ARCHIVED -  Transcript/Transcription - Vancouver, B.C. / (C.-B.) - 16 October 2001

PRIVATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

            TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

  FOR THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND

       TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

 

 

 

 

        TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DU

           CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION

ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES

 

 

 

 

 

                       SUBJECT / SUJET:

 

 

Multiple broadcasting and ownership applications & applications further to Public Notice 2001-32 "Call for applications for a broadcasting licence for an ethnic television programming undertaking to serve Vancouver, B.C.".

Demandes de radiodiffusion et de propriétés multiples ainsi que les demandes suite à l'avis public CRTC 2001-32 "Appel de demandes de licence de radiodiffusion visant l'exploitation d'une entreprise de programmation à caractère ethnique pour desservir Vancouver (C.-B.)".

 

 

 

 

HELD AT:                            TENUE À:

 

Renaissance Vancouver       Renaissance Vancouver

Hotel Harbourside                Hotel Harbourside

1133 West Hastings Street   1133 West Hastings Street

Harbourside Ballroom II & III  Harbourside Ballroom II & III

Vancouver, British Columbia Vancouver (Colombie-Britannique)

 

 

16 October, 2001                 le 16 octobre 2001

 

 

 

                              Volume 2

 

 

 

 

Transcripts

 

In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages

Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be

bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members

and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of

Contents.

 

However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded

verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in

either of the official languages, depending on the language

spoken by the participant at the public hearing.

 

 

 

 

Transcription

 

Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues

officielles, les procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront

bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des

membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience

publique ainsi que la table des matières.

 

Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu

textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée

et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues

officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le

participant à l'audience publique.

                Canadian Radio‑television and

             Telecommunications Commission

 

             Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des

             télécommunications canadiennes

 

 

                   Transcript / Transcription

 

 

Multiple broadcasting and ownership applications & applications further to Public Notice 2001-32 "Call for applications for a broadcasting licence for an ethnic television programming undertaking to serve Vancouver, B.C.".

Demandes de radiodiffusion et de propriétés multiples ainsi que les demandes suite à l'avis public CRTC 2001-32 "Appel de demandes de licence de radiodiffusion visant l'exploitation d'une entreprise de programmation à caractère ethnique pour desservir Vancouver (C.-B.)".

 

 

BEFORE / DEVANT:

 

Andrée Wylie                           Vice-Chair Broadcasting

/Vice-Président, Radio diffusion

Cindy Grauer                            Commissioner / Conseillère

Martha Wilson                          Commissioner / Conseillère

Joan Pennefather                      Commissioner / Conseillère

Andrew Cardozo                       Commissioner / Conseiller

 

 

ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:

 

Martine Vallee                          Hearing Manager / Gérant de

                                               l'audience

Marguerite Vogel                      Secretary / secrétaire

Carolyn Pinsky                         Legal Counsel /

                                               conseillère juridique

 

 

 

HELD AT:                            TENUE À:

 

Renaissance Vancouver       Renaissance Vancouver

Hotel Harbourside                Hotel Harbourside

1133 West Hastings Street   1133 West Hastings Street

Harbourside Ballroom II & III  Harbourside Ballroom II & III

Vancouver, British Columbia Vancouver (Colombie-Britannique)

 

 

 

16 October, 2001                                le 16 octobre 2001

 

 

                              Volume 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES

 

                                                                                PAGE / PARA NO.

 

PHASE I

 

 

APPLICATION BY / APPLICATION PAR

 

by Multivan Broadcast Corporation /                                                 1505

par Multivan Broadcast Corporation

Continued / Continuation)

 

 

PHASE II

 

 

 

INTERVENTION BY / INTERVENTION PAR

 

by CFMT-TV / par CFMT-TV                                                            2704

 

by Multivan Broadcast Corporation /                                                 2729

par Multivan Broadcast Corporation

 

 

PHASE III

 

 

INTERVENTION BY / INTERVENTION PAR

 

 

by Fairchild Television /                                                                   2747

par Fairchild Television

 

by Chinese Community Television /                                                  2804

par Chinese Community Television

 

by Telitalia Television /                                                                    2914

par Telitalia Television

 

by I.T. Productions /                                                                        2980

par I.T. Productions

 

by Braghwant Sandhu /                                                                   3147

par Braghwant Sandhu

 

by Manpreet Grewal /                                                                      3171

par Manpreet Grewal

 

Vancouver, British Columbia / Vancouver, Colombie Britannique

--- Upon commencing on Tuesday, October 16, 2001 at 0830 / L'audience débute le mardi 16 octobre 2001 à 0830

 

1505    seq level0 \h \r0 seq level1 \h \r0 seq level2 \h \r0 seq level3 \h \r0 seq level4 \h \r0 seq level5 \h \r0 seq level6 \h \r0 seq level7 \h \r0 THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning.  Bonjour, et nous vous souhaitons la bienvenue une deuxième fois.  I've already been introduced, so go ahead, please. I've got to make sure my viewers are in line with the proper language. Go ahead, Commissioner Pennefather, please.

 

1506    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Good morning ladies and gentlemen.  Thank you again for your presentation last evening.  Let's pretend that we just took a short break and we'll carry on right through.  As you know, Madam Chair explained just before break last evening that we will follow a pattern of questioning similar to yesterday.  I will begin.  I will have several questions on programming and on the demand for programming, specifically looking at the studies that are included with your application.  Commissioner Cardozo will then follow and look at your application in terms of community feedback, social issues, local presence and Commissioner Wilson will cover your business plan, synergies and certain technical areas, questions in that dossier.  She will as well probably have some questions that take us back through the application and recap some of the questions that we have asked or haven't asked. 

 

1507    So, we'll begin with programming.  The purpose of the questions are to help us understand better how the vision which you outlined yesterday in your presentation and video and in your application and how your business plan translate into programs on the screen for audiences.  As specifically as possible, we'd like to explore your program concepts, your schedule and your relationships with the independent production sector.  I'll also have questions, as I mentioned, regarding the demand studies and how those studies influenced your scheduling and your programming. 

 

1508    As I said before, my colleagues will take a look at this same program schedule from the point of view of diversity and business questions and local ownership.  In fact, your presentation placed considerable emphasis on the whole matter of local ownership and the business acumen of your team.  But as you, yourself, have said in your application, programs which truly reflect the community are fundamental to the application.  So if we look at Schedule 17, which is, in effect, your program grid and your discussion of the programs attached to that - this is your grid, Schedule 17 - we see there how you do intend to meet the expectations of the communities to be served and your advisory board's expectations.  I'm going to ask you to tell us how and why you took this particular approach to programming.  So my first question is a general one just to get started, and then we'll break that down to look at your ethnic programming, the local nature of it, the third language programming and the various components of that ethnic programming and then we'll look at your non-ethnic programming and get into the details of why you propose to do what you will be doing. 

 

1509    As a general comment, can you tell us how you made the decisions as to what types of programs would best meet the needs of the ethnic communities you propose to serve.

 

1510    MR. HOLTBY:  Good morning, commissioners.  I think I'll start this, and I know that my colleagues will have some things to say.  When we started this process I think we recognized early on that ethnic programming is local, and that this community is underserved with local ethnic programming.  We do have, as the Commission is well aware, programming from some specialty services, but we decided early on that what we needed to do here was to provide local reflection, relevant programming, sensitive programming.  We did that in consultation, not only amongst ourselves, because as the Commission is well aware, we all live here, work here. The citizens of Vancouver are our neighbours.  We also sought out the advice of our advisory council, the thirteen representatives of various communities in this city.  We also did extensive research and asked the public what they were looking for and it was clear that what the public wanted was local programs, local information.  Because of the background of some of our shareholders they had a sense of what was required, trying to understand Canadian institutions, the need when you come to this new country, the need to have that kind of information, information in your own language so that you can understand it.

 

1511    So that was the background of the philosophy behind the schedule.  And then we, of course, looked at the rules of the CRTC, the 60/40 model.  Our proposal in front of you, the schedule that we have developed, shows 68 percent of ethnic programming, and we hope that we can do that.  We also were very conscious of the economics of this business, and that is our hope. 

 

1512    So when we look at the individual parts of the local schedule, clearly, one of the main items that was needed, main programming resources that was needed in this community, was news, and we have scheduled two hours of news in prime time and two hours of news in the morning and those are distinct newscasts.  While we are living our day, the local and national and international news would be, of course, displayed on our evening newscast, and as we sleep, in other parts of the world is moving forward.  In Asia, for example, their day is starting as we're going to sleep, so we would be bringing back news from the homeland and portraying that on the early evening news.  And so we would have two newscasts that were distinct.

 

1513    We also tried to accommodate as many different ethnic groups and languages as we could possibly accommodate in the application.  We have solicited recommendations from program producers, from our advisory council, of what these different ethnic communities would want to see, what would be important for them.  We tried to keep it as local as we possibly could, recognizing that there would be some programs that would be of interest that were foreign, and perhaps even some programs from other communities in Canada.  They make up a small portion of our schedule.

 

1514    MR. HO:  Commissioner, if I could just add to this?  The other thing that we also have done when we were looking at this whole Vancouver supply, in supplementary to what Mr. Holtby just said, we also looked at all the scheduling of Shaw Multicultural Channel, as well as Talentvision, and  Fairchild.  We look at all of their programs and we did a fair amount of analysis as to what kind of program they provide and we tried to complement everybody's programming there.  For instance, most of the programs that we notice are imported programs, and we also noticed that our programming are mostly local programming.  So that's one difference.  The other difference is language that's been provided.  We tried to avoid, or tried to complement as much as we can, so that we do not broadcast the same ethnic language hour as they do.  In other words, if they have an hour that's broadcasted, let's say a Korean program, in the morning, then we will broadcast a Korean program afterwards.  We tried to do that with quite a bit of adjustment, so we have taken that audience into consideration, broaden the market and taken the complementary type of thinking.  Thank you.

 

1515    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you very much.  I'll address the questions, I guess, to you Mr. Holtby and you can pass it on or please jump in.  I'm sure you'll all have something to add as we get going here but I'd like to, obviously, go back over some of the things you've just said.

 

1516    On the ethnic programming, you propose in your application 86 hours a week of ethnic programming; is that correct?

 

1517    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.  That's what the sample schedule shows.

 

1518    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And that's in your supplementary brief.  Of this 86 hours of ethnic programming, you will carry 55.5 hours a week of locally produced programming, to quote your brief, of which 28.6 hours a week is original.  Are these correct numbers?

 

1519    MR. HOLTBY:  Actually the local, original hours is 42 and a half and the re-feeds are 17 and a half.

 

1520    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Is that a week or a month?

 

1521    MR. HOLTBY:  That's a week.

 

1522    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That's by week?  Then we'll have to come back and clarify that because I have a different analysis.  In fact, if we look at the revised Schedule 17, in other words, the detailed description of programming, you sent a revised version with the deficiency letter of July 30^th, we come up with 60 hours a week as opposed to 55.5 of local.  Could you explain the difference?

 

1523    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.  And that's the 42 and a half and the 17 and a half adds up to 60.  I'm not sure what the reason for the difference is.  Perhaps James can shed some light.

 

1524    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So, between 55.5, which is repeated quite often in your supplementary brief, you agree it's closer to 60 total?

 

1525    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, the 55 and a half, what we've said is that that would be an absolute minimum of local that we would do.

 

1526    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.

 

1527    MR. HOLTBY:  But our sample schedule is at 60.  And that's our hope, that that is the level of programming that we would be able to accomplish, so what we've given you is the absolute minimum.

 

1528    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  As Madam Chair said yesterday with the other applicant, it's important that we clarify this.  You may want to think about it as we go through discussion, but in the end we'll come back to looking at how we confirm your commitment.

 

1529    MR. HOLTBY:  Sure.

 

1530    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Mr. Ho, you wanted to add?

 

1531    MR. HO:  Yes, I just wanted to add to this.  Actually, the 55.5 hour is a calculation that we have done.  Two of the programs actually we have not calculated in.  We only calculate the original hour, that is the Yoga and You and Tai Chi: Mind and Body, in the morning.  The actual hour that's missing is actually in these two.  We have 3.5 hours, in other words, seven hours of original and repeated program, whereas we only included two and a half hours of original non-repeat in the program.  So if you calculate everything inclusive, that's seven hours instead of two and a half hours, and that makes up the differences there.  So instead of 55.5 it is 60, and we just mentioned 55.5 so that we can explain during this process.

 

1532    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you very much.  I think that's becoming clearer.  Let's go now to questions about the substance of the programming, the content itself instead of just the numbers.  Let's talk about news.  You did say, Mr. Holtby, and your application speaks to this point, that you put a great focus on news.  Can you explain why you have done that in more detail?

 

1533    MR. HOLTBY:  The newscast will feature local, national, and international news, and to that end, on the local side we promised 13 vehicles:   nine news-gathering vehicles, two satellite trucks and two production trucks.  The philosophy behind that is that we believe that with this type of television, with ethnic television, you've got to get out in the community.  So it's very much a remote newscast, very extensive newsgathering.  As a matter of fact, I think it would be second to none as far as local television stations as far as equipment available to gather news in this local community.  So our local newscast, our local component of our newscast will be gathered with the use of those and local reporters. 

 

1534    On the international and national front, we have had extensive discussions with both CTV and CBC, and we have a commitment from our friends at CTV that we would have access to their video, which we think is very important.  Obviously, we would translate that into the language of broadcast.  But when you're trying to produce a top quality newscast you really have to have the pictures from whatever the news story is, so they have agreed that we could have access to their video and then our local editors and producers and reporters would put the story together from a local perspective.  So if there is an economic conference in Hong Kong, for example, we would be there because CTV would be there.  We would at least get the pictures and then we would, through various news sources, including CTV, but news wire services, we would then produce the story.

 

1535    In addition to that, one of our shareholders, James Ho, has a radio station and there will be some synergy as a result of that.  For example, when the legislature is sitting, we will certainly have a reporter over in Victoria and they would have a dual responsibility to cover news for the television station as well as the radio station.

 

1536    So our news that we're going to be able to provide the public here in Vancouver will be every bit as good and good quality and relevant and sensitive as any newscast in this market.  That's our hope and our aim.

 

1537    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  If I can pursue that a bit.

 

1538    MR. HO:  I'm sorry Commissioner, can I just add one more thing.

 

1539    COMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.

 

1540    MR. HO:  The other thing, like I said, I would like to go back again as to what's being offered in this market.  While we are seeing a lot of news that is being offered in this market, especially in the ethnic community again, it is imported, foreign news, very, very little coverage of local news.  This is why we are very heavily emphasising local coverage of news.  Further to that, we also look at what's being covered from Fairchild, news as well, and most of it again, is coming from Toronto.  Very few of their news coverage are local Vancouver, unless a big event like this.  I mean, they will cover with some extent of information but because of the recent changes that they also have to make, the amount of news coverage has been greatly reduced about the local coverage here.  And we did expect that to happen as we were reading complaint letters that was sent to CRTC earlier.  So we anticipated all this, plus our experience in the newsgathering in our radio station throughout all this period, we are known to be a very local news radio station.  That's how we survive the niche market at this point.

 

1541    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I thank you, Mr. Ho.  I think Commissioner Wilson will go back on exploring with you the synergies, but I must say on the news, I still would like you to give us a better sense of how this newscast, on which you place tremendous emphasis in terms of the blocks in the schedule, differs from what is there now, starting with, since you place such a great deal of emphasis on the local quality of your application, local ownership, understanding what the local needs are, what's the breakdown between the local, the regional, the national and the international?  I mean, that sounds like a fairly substantial package of news where the local may take a second, third or even fourth seat to the international news, particularly since you put the emphasis on the CTV video, et cetera.  What is it that makes this a local product, local newscast, because it's a major vehicle of your whole approach?

 

1542    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, the breakdown of any newscast varies every day.  I've been involved, as you know, for years in broadcasting and I've never probably seen two days where it's exactly the same between local, national and international.  It really depends on the news and what's relevant for that particular day.  But we have earmarked and set aside and committed significant resources to collect the local news.  The viewer -- it's clear that what the ethnic communities in this city want is local reflection, they want local information, so that is going to be a very significant part of the newscast, in their language. 

 

1543    They also are interested in what's happening nationally and what's happening internationally.  They are not, you know, so insular that they're just concerned about their own specific community or their province or their city, they're interested in what's going on in the world and they want to understand what's going on in the world. Our plan is to try and interpret that, get it in their language so that they can become as informed as any other viewer in Vancouver. 

 

1544    We have great newscasts in this city and the quality and the level of expectation is very high, and this station has to meet that with the ethnic communities.  They're not going to tolerate anything but state-of-the-art newscast.

 

1545    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, you can understand our concern, again, because we're looking at an application which places an emphasis on local and your accounting included this news even if we said we'd limit the repeats and count it only once, just to be absolutely conservative, if I may quote you.  It's important that we get a sense what will be on the screen, that is really defining this as a local product as opposed to a newscast which, to quote Mr. Ho, is similar, it brings a lot of foreign, or international news.  Not to say that people aren't interested, but it's just to get a feeling for what makes the difference.  Why is this complementary to what is already available?  I do see local ethnic news as I watch television here.  What makes this different?

 

1546    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, the difference -- first off, I'd like to address the issue about the, I guess your concern about the amount of national and international.  As I said, our arrangement for this is with CTV, so the amount of material that would be available would be what they deem as is important from a national perspective and it's what they're broadcasting on a national perspective.  We're not talking about every new story around the world or in this country.

 

1547    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Excuse me for interrupting.  You say CTV is going to make those choices for you?

 

1548    MR. HOLTBY:  No.  I'm saying as far as video goes, that's all the video that we will have.  They will not produce and be involved in the production of the newscast, but our arrangement is with video.  The Commission is well aware, they've now expanded their news bureaus.  They are going to have extensive availability of videos.  There's no way a local ethnic station could accommodate that.  And if we looked at what many of the local -- or what many of the conventional broadcasters are using for international news, they're using ABC, or CNN, or other news sources.  In the case of CTV, they've got Canadians covering as much as they can, they've got a number of bureaus all over, so we think that's a positive.  But, clearly, the reflection in this newscast is local.  That's what's needed in this market and we will produce a relevant, sensitive, reflective newscast to our viewers.  And at the end of the day, they will decide if we're doing the job right and this station lives or dies on its ability to attract audience. 

 

1549    And I think we can attract audience, I have no doubt about that.  We have all the elements in place.  We're going to have extensive resources to collect local news.  We have -- extensive because of our relationships with CTV and others.  We'll have the ability to give them a full package and that's what they want.  They don't want a scaled down package.

 

1550    MR. HO:  Let me just add, in addition to the arrangement that we have made with CTV, CBC also is talking with us.  In addition to all of that Canadian side of things, we also have discussions with countries on the South-East Asia, Asia and South-East Asian countries and their television stations because if we have a very important thing that's happened in that area, sometimes the very local market are bringing it out as quickly as possible, and we have the discussion that we're able to use their footage as well, which is going to be downloaded over through satellite on a daily basis as well.  But we will put in an angle to it and, you know, our angle will be talking about it during our news hours, using their footage as well.

 

1551    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So if we look now at the local side of the news, again, your local news editors will be making the choices.  You mentioned having equipment out there, trucks and others.  I think in your application you say that there will be six such units and today or in your presentation, nine and did you say nine today?  It's just a small detail, but you put an emphasis on being able to get out into the community.  How many of these units will you have, nine or six?

 

1552    MR. HOLTBY:  We would have nine.

 

1553    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Nine.  The area that you are talking about when you say local coverage, where these news gathering units will be going, what are we talking about?  The Greater Vancouver area?  The Lower Mainland?  What does local mean in this sense?

 

1554    MR. HOLTBY:  It would be the Lower Mainland.  There was a discussion yesterday about the election in Richmond.  I mean, that's the kind of thing.  It really depends where the story is, but the fact that they are mobile, that's the whole purpose of them being mobile is to go to where the news is and to cover it, whether it's a news tragedy, whether it's a political story, whether it's a celebration, a festival, to go where the news is.

 

1555    MS. DEOL:  You were asking how it's local.  Well, the use of nine units, I mean that's as much as any mainstream station has to go out there and get stories and do live spots.  I think every newscast would start with what the local scene is and what happened in your own backyard today, and from that point it would go on to what's happening nationally, what happened in our collective backyard today as a country.  From that point it would go on to what's happening around the world that affects us.  So I think that there's no, you know, I mean, it would start with local news made by us, produced by us.  We would be the ones saying in our every day line-up meetings, this matters, this does not, this matters, this doesn't.  So I think it's completely local, the whole viewpoint.  The start of the show would start with local news and then move out from there.

 

1556    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That's a good point that leads right to my next question, and I think Mr. Ho's already touched on it.  The key to this, as I understand it, is the mix depends on the interests and what's happening in the world today.  You're assuring us that a large -- main component of this is local news.  Those decisions are made by the news editors and news directors.  You say on page 14 of your supplementary brief, and you did repeat this in your presentation last evening that, and I quote, "TV news directors and assignment editors for MVBC News will be chosen for their sensitivity to issues of interest for ethnic audiences."  Can you expand on that and how you will assure that happens?

 

1557    MR. HO:  This is again getting back to the appearances that we have from our radio station.  Again, from our radio station, we are very sensitive as to what's happening in the community, in the ethnic community, as to compared to the mainstream community.  There's quite often things happen in the ethnic community which is very a major thing.  It may not be a major situation in the mainstream community, and sometimes it is something happening in the mainstream community that's effecting the ethnic community as well and we would like to bring that attention to.

 

1558    One of the key important things in selecting the editor is the better understanding this person has towards the ethnic community, whether it's the Chinese and the South-Asian community.  We have that in place at this moment that we'll be looking at.  And I'm going to take the Chinese, for incidence.  There's many, many different events that's happening in the Chinese community.  Some are geared towards the Hong Kong community, Cantonese speaking, some are geared towards the Mandarin speaking community.  You have to know all these happenings.  On top of it there are situations such as Canada Day, July 1st, which is a celebration that we would like to bring out to all the community, all the ethnic community, to know about it and, therefore, under the news item as well, we have quite extensive coverage on that.

 

1559    It is all these standards that we are choosing, and once -- if you are in the community doing the business or doing the broadcast in the business side of things, you quite often meet with a lot of qualified people who are abundant in this community here who are, in this community, currently living in Vancouver, but have no chance of working ever, either for a mainstream community TV station, mainstream TV station, or anybody else because of various reasons that's happening in their community.  We will be looking at all these talents, all these people and we'll be providing a chance for them to provide a service to us.

 

1560    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner, if I could just add one small point.  I think it's a well-known fact in broadcasting that the station that has the clearest understanding and a feel for the community is the one that will win in the local newscast.  If you look at early morning news, for example, and you have a national early morning system here, CTV has an early morning newscast and events, and those decisions are made in Toronto.  Invariably, in every local market, they get out-rated by the local because the people that are on the street and understand what's relevant to the community, can reflect that on the screen.  And so what we're doing here is taking it one step further; is not only being local, but we have to be sensitive in understanding the community that we're trying to reach.  So if it's a Chinese community, or South Asian community, they have to be very knowledgeable in understanding that as well.  So they're local and then they're understanding the ethnic community.

 

1561    MR. HO:  And let me just add, I forgot to mention the timing, the time as to how much time we're going to cover.  The local news that's happening surrounding the Lower Mainland will be at least half an hour out of the one hour and then we'll be allocating approximately, I'm saying approximately, 15 minutes to international and 15 minutes to national. 

 

1562    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you. I think that was my first question.  But, as you know, I think it's important that we allow you to speak about these things because you don't - and I'm sure everyone will agree - understand the potential for success just through counting the numbers.  It's important to get a sense of what's driving this.  I'm sure that my colleague, Commissioner Cardozo, will pursue the question of sensitivity, whether it's just a matter of knowing what's going on in the community or if we're talking about something else because I think the whole point of this is a discussion of who makes the choices of what we see on the screen.

 

1563    I'm going to move to a couple of other questions on the news.  Actually I just asked that question and we did talk about the teams and the technical equipment.  So let's move on to another component, a fairly extensive one of your program schedule and that's what's called Lifestyles programs.  And here, using Schedule 17 and page 15 of the supplementary brief, I think it's important we understand this component of the schedule.  It's, frankly, a little vague as it stands now.  What will these programs look like and why have you chosen this format?

 

1564    MR. HO: First of all, let me say that we have extensive help from our advisory council as to what's happening in this community.  Further to that, we also have quite a bit of extensive proposals from all the different producers that are going to be producing these programs.  Well, I can say that for sure, there's no shortage of ideas.  I'm just bringing a sample of scheduling here as to what's been proposed to us from various communities here.  And the first page just happens to be a Vietnamese program, and these are the people who lives in our community and know what's missing in our community, and they have also mentioned to us what they would like to see, you know, in their  population. 

 

1565    One of these proposals comes to us and says, very simply, they would like to have, with our vision -- I want to read this one short paragraph here. 

 

 

 

Our vision is to provide Vietnamese residents in B.C. with relevant news (they highlight relevant news) and information in the Vietnamese language on the issue of the week.  The target audience of the program will be primarily Lower Mainland viewers of the Vietnamese descent.  The program is designed to build a bridge within the Vietnamese community (that's within their own community) in the local viewer area and to bring them news from their homeland in Vietnam.  Topics will be local, international news and current affairs, also some entertainment features. 

 

 

 

1566    So news and current affairs, entertainment, and source, and the contact and also he mentioned that they utilize intensively the Internet and newspaper.  And, by the way, we will have people going out to their own community to discover what's happening.  This is one of the things that the Vietnamese have provided.

 

1567    It's going to be a little bit different from, let's say a Filipino producer.  The Filipino producer have a different background.  And just for your information and so that you know what's happening in the Filipino market, it is a growing community and most of the people actually live in Vancouver from the Filipino descent.  The people there, they actually, they speak Tagalog, that's their own local language and they have a very extensive understanding of English as well, so they can speak two languages most of them.  I would say 90 percent or 99 percent of them.  And what they wanted to do is, on their program, they would want to have a person who is fluent in both English and Tagalog. 

 

1568    They would like to provide, again, the concern of the local news, relative news focus in particular on the concerns that will impact the Filipino Canadian community. The latter portion, the news and they would be doing the interviews with the local Filipino, local people and people who comes from Filipino countries and the Filipino celebrities. 

 

1569    They also want to conduct a second generation of Filipinos to allow them to express their views when occasion arises.  Forums and debates could be held between Filipino Canadians representing either the English or the Tagalog, thus helping Filipinos gain a better understanding of the issues that affect their daily lives.

 

1570    Again, like I say, a lot of these Lifestyles, what we have found, and from the recommendation that we have, we found that to be, again, geared towards a local flavour - a lot of local programs, actually, that has not been aired or it has no chance of being aired in the surrounding Vancouver area or in any of the mainstream TV or in any of the existing specialty TVs or multicultural channels.  You know, certainly, we will be the one that's doing all these types of airings.

 

1571    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you for all of those descriptions.

 

1572    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner, what we've said in our application is that our schedule will be the result of extensive consultation with the communities involved, with consultation with our advisory council, and the fact that we live here is also an added benefit, and consultation with the independent producers.  So the schedule that will evolve and the programs that will evolve, on that schedule will be a result of that consultation and will be inclusive and reflective of those communities and that's so -- I realize that it's vague, but we didn't think that it was meaningful for us to say, well, you the Filipino community, this is the kind of program that you should have.  We think that's the backwards way of doing it.  What we want to do is to consult and to then deliver them the kind of program that is important to their specific community.

 

1573    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I understand your point from the content level.  So who's producing these programs?  Are you producing them in-house, are you co-producing, are they brokered hours with these various independent producers?  How does it work?

 

1574    MR. HOLTBY:  We estimate about 10  -- let me back up.  The news, for example, will be done with in-house people.  The producers, the editors, the reporters, they'll all be staff people at the television station.  The other programs, we estimate approximately 16 percent, or roughly around 10 of those hours would be produced by independent producers.  And when I say independent producers --

 

1575    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Just talking about the Lifestyle hours.  So that 16 percent applies to the Lifestyle hours only?

 

1576    MR. HOLTBY:  Sixteen percent of our ethnic programming would be --

 

1577    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.  And where the independent producers are working is within these Lifestyle blocks?  Is that it?

 

1578    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  Well, it depends on the definition of what an independent producer --

 

1579    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  We'll get back to that in a whole section on independent production.  What I'm interested to know is just the Lifestyle programming.  Let's say Spanish Lifestyles Monday from 10:00 to 11:00, is that hour a production that you create, or is that hour produced in co-production, or is that hour brokered and the independent producer just uses that hour as he or she plans?

 

1580    MR. HOLTBY:  Not brokered.  We're not talking about brokered.  That specific -- we've identified, I think, 25 independent producers in our application, and there's many more.  This is a very vibrant community of independent producers.  Some of them, it's not a full-time job.  They're not independent producers in the same context of Alliance Atlantis for example.  In one case, one of the fellows that I've met runs the Italian newspaper, but he also can produce radio and television and he's a very experienced and very creative person. So what he would like -- he doesn't want to be an employee.  He wants to work on the show and produce a show for his community.  So there will be a mix.  There are some producers, I think, out there who would like to come on board as a full-time employee.  What we said is that about 10 hours of our schedule on a weekly basis would be produced by people other than employees of the company, what we call independent producers.

 

1581    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  I'd like to come back to that a little later just to clarify your relationship with the independent sector generally because there seems to be several different approaches.  Just so I understand, you've chosen to say in this schedule, Spanish, Italian, Scandinavian, Ukrainian, German, Dutch, Portuguese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese - I may have missed one - but as an example, these are the groups that currently are scheduled to have a Lifestyles program.  How did you decide that these would be the groups for this Lifestyles approach?

 

1582    MR. HO:  Again, I would like to bring back to your attention the extensive advice that we've been getting from our advisory council as well as our producers in this community.  And the other thing is my extensive multicultural experience in the community as well.  It is always the situation that our airtime was to serve the majority of the population most of the time.  What we have come to, I just want to bring it to your attention - just give me a second here, allow me to go to - one of our criteria, as I'm saying here, is to serving most of the population most of the time.  The top five languages that we're covering of their mother tongue, we're servicing about 68 percent of the ethnic population.  The top 10 population that we're looking at, the top 10 is the 88 percent of the total population.  I've got a little notice here.  Yes, I forgot to mention, I have to give these people quite a bit of credit as well, the people on the (inaudible) also have done quite extensive research for us at the same time.

 

1583    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  We will get to the researchers at the end.

 

1584    MR. HO:  But overall speaking, like I say, the top five languages that we're serving is carving 68 percent and the top 10 is 88 percent.

 

1585    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So, basically the demographics?

 

1586    MR. HO:  The demographics.  And, of course, we identified there are over 75 communities living in Vancouver.  There are larger communities, there are smaller communities.  This is not to say that we're not going to service them at all.  In our program schedule we also allow certain rooms in there called "various other languages".  We understand that some of these smaller community maybe was 5,000, 3,000 people, such as the Tamil population, I understand is a very small population but they're part of the South-Asian community and they have their own distinct culture and languages.  So, instead of covering them on a weekly basis, or a fixed hour, because very little things happen in that community, what can you cover?  A lot of things you'd probably have to import it, but we also found out these people would like to know what's happening within their own community.  So we have allocated various hours of languages in our schedule to be covered in that as well, and sometimes, if it is important enough, it's going to be reported as part of our news item.  But we want to cover some of these smaller groups of people from a local perspective as well.  We do not want them to be left out. 

 

1587    But again, like I say, over 70-some community, there's only so much we can do.  And we would like to, you know, in our schedule, we build in these rooms already.

 

1588    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Very helpful, Mr. Ho.  I see the balancing act you're trying to achieve there.  Just on the Lifestyles again, you read a couple of proposals, I think, for concept within the block, let's say of the Vietnamese or the Filipino.  When you, as Multivan, look at these proposals, do you have anything to say about the content of that hour, and if so, what would be your criteria?       

 

1589    MR. HO:  Like I say, this is something that we do together.  Both sides will have tremendous amount of input.  One of the key important part of the thing that we also found out that what these people would like to have is quality programming.  They would like to have usage of our studio, our equipment, et cetera.  All of these things will be provided to them.  On top of it, a lot of them have great passion in their own community and they would like to cover humongous amount of things that's happening in their community.  We have talked about lending them, or just purchase certain equipment like cameras, and just lend it to these people to film.  If they have two hours a week perhaps, they would like to go to their own communities throughout the week and just take down or film whatever is happening in their community that they feel is of importance.  And of all these, maybe seven or eight hours long of footage, they will have to edit it, and we will have a certain input as well as to what kind of editing that can be done.  For instance, we will not be influenced in terms of  commercial items will be put on the news hours.  And some of these programs they want to produce, we also wanted to make sure is quality type of program.  And we will help them, assist them in building their techniques and know-how along the way in.  Perhaps Doug would like to add to it?

 

1590    MR. HOLTBY:  I just have one comment.  At the end of the day, we are responsible for every hour that we broadcast on the station and we're very aware of the potential for problems, and so we retain that responsibility.  But we believe that at the end of the day, the people that live in these communities are best equipped to reflect back to those communities of what's relevant for them.  And so it's quite different than conventional television in that regard.  It's, as you said, a balancing act between communities and it's a balancing act to give the freedom for them to produce the kinds of show that they think is necessary but we have to, obviously, retain control of what's broadcast.  We're responsible for what's broadcast on the television station.

 

1591    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Who will own the rights for the program produced, let's say, in a Lifestyles hour?

 

1592    MR. HOLTBY:  It could be various arrangements.  I think that, by and large, the program will only be relevant for the local market and if the independent producer wanted to own it, that would be fine.  I don't think there's other sales.  But there would be various arrangements in that regard.  There will be some producers that are not interested in the copyright for example, and they're not interested in getting through all of those legalities, but there will be various arrangements.

 

1593    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  We can come back to that as to why.  Just one last point again.  I wasn't sure if I understood why you didn't -- you said this wouldn't be brokered time, but why did you not choose that vehicle?

 

1594    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I've had, over the last seven months, many meetings with independent producers and what I've been told is they don't want to do that.  They say, "We want to produce shows."  One of the fellows said to me, "I'm not a salesperson."  I don't have the time to go out and sell the time and I'd rather you do that.  That's your business, to sell the time.  I want to produce shows."  I guess that's the way it's evolved in other markets.  What I think is the most appropriate way to develop ethnic programming for the future, and to grow it, is to have producers do what they do best and that's to produce quality programming that attracts an audience.  And once you have an audience, Commissioner, and you're able to get measurement of that audience -- and there's some issues there and you dealt with them yesterday, and there's challenges but it can work, and we now have technology in place that we're going to be able to get measurement of these programs and these communities.  If you can deliver those, if you can deliver people and you can measure them, you can sell it.  There's absolutely no question about that.  And I think that's a better way of going.  Let the producers do what they do best. Don't have them having to go out and try to sell the spot.  To me, it just doesn't make any sense.  Some producers that I've met over my career, I don't think could sell.  I won't get into that, but --

 

1595    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Best not.  Moving right along.  Thank you.  We'll come back to a couple of questions.  But if we look at the programming approach overall, we've talked about news, we've talked about Lifestyles.  There are also what I would call the entertainment component, the shows in the latter evening.  It's Table by the Exit, Sounds Right Tonight, et cetera.  Do you foresee any other kind of programming?  You talked about attracting audiences.  Do you see - I forgot the cooking shows - do you see any other kind of programming in your schedule in the future?

 

1596    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, when you do your analysis, which I'm sure the Commission has done, of our program expenditures you will note that there's some $900,000 a year that is not allocated to any particular program here.  And what that is, is resources that are available to the station to produce events and special events, and as James was talking about other communities and to extend from the 22 to other communities, celebrations, the tragedy of September 11^th.  If we'd been in operation, that would have required additional resources, not unlike a conventional television station when they have an election.  It requires additional resources to cover that election and there would have to be, I think we would have a responsibility to try and explain what's going on and, you know, with this tragedy and some documentary. 

 

1597    So there'd be documentaries and specials and community events that would be covered as well.  A schedule, as the Commission is well aware, may be relevant for one week and the next week, and whether it's conventional television or ethnic television, it has to change and it has to be reflective of what's happening in that particular week.

 

1598    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  But it does give us an indication of where you're heading.

 

1599    MR. HOLTBY:  Oh, yes.

 

1600    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And I think out of it we get what's important, a sense of your commitments, particularly under the ethnic policy. 

 

1601    MR. HOLTBY:  Absolutely.

 

1602    MR. HOLTBY:  You mentioned audiences.  The main focus of your local, ethnic programming clearly is targeted to Chinese and South-Asian audiences and you are aware of concerns that are being expressed about this.  Without getting into the intervention period where we will discuss this matter I'm sure, do you have any comment on that point?

 

1603    MR. HOLTBY:  We've been, and I know James has some comments to make, we're very well aware of what's available in this market.  There is entertainment programming available in Chinese. There is all these specialty channels that either have been launched or are in the process of being launched.  The one thing that they don't have, though, by the very nature of them being a specialty service on a national basis, is they don't have local reflection, so that's why we've designed a schedule that has local reflection. 

 

1604    With regards to ours, we're very well aware of that.  Chinese, I think, represents some 47 percent of our ethnic audience, but I think it represents about 25 or 28 percent of our programming,  so we have scaled that down, recognizing that there is other programs available to the Chinese audience.  In addition to that, as James pointed out earlier, we've tried to be sensitive to where we schedule it as well,  keeping in mind that this has to be a relevant television station as well.  We've tried to be sensitive to that as well.  James?

 

1605    MR. HO:  Again, like I'm saying here, when we put this whole thing together, instead of putting it from a competitive point of view, in other words, if you have the same program, you're successful, I want to do the same program at the same time, same hour and try to grab your audiences.  I mean, again, I wanted to emphasis, we're trying to be a complement situation, complementing each other, and broaden the audiences.  In other words, if Shaw Multicultural has one hour of one particular group and if we're going to have two hours we're going to absolutely destroy them or kill them because we're commercial, we can produce a lot of programs.  We have the ability, financial resources to produce a much better quality program.  Instead of that, we air our time at a different hour.  We try our best to complement them so that the same community can turn to our free over-the-air station and can turn the hour to Shaw Multicultural in the next hour or the hour before and watch the program.  So instead of having two hours on our station here, the whole market actually have three hours now to watch.  And I think it's something of a necessity in this community.

 

1606    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I take your point, but I did note that you did say there is a concern.  There was also a concern that the Commission might have in looking at the whole picture here that the point is to serve as many communities as possible, in addition to counter-scheduling, why not expand the numbers of groups you are reaching instead of those that are currently well-served according to some of the studies.  Do you have any comment on where the Commission should position itself on that score?  In other words, isn't there a fair case to be made for some kind of limitation.  We have to look at it, as the Chair suggested, from a regulatory point of view and, yes, there's a balancing act here, but isn't there a fair case to be made from our point of view too, of not only the impact locally, but the impact in terms of an opportunity here to serve other groups?

 

1607    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner, I'll start.  We wouldn't be providing a service, a relevant service to the - let's use the Chinese community as an example - to the Chinese community if what we did was we put the Chinese programming head to head, and tried to hurt their other choices.  We want to expand their viewing options, so it doesn't make any sense, and you're absolutely right, when you pull on one string another thing happens, and the more ethnic Chinese that you would put on the station, or South Asian, of course it limits the amount of other communities that you can feature on a weekly basis.  And what we've given to the Commission is a commitment that we would a minimum of 22 communities, and we've given you what we think is a realistic balance, recognizing - and we have recognized - that there is alternatives for both South Asian and Chinese, and so the number of hours is not reflected of their size of community.  It's not.  It's substantially lower.  The hours on our schedule is lower than the size of the community's relative -- the overall ethnic pie.  So we have recognized that, and we're very sensitive of that, and if the Commission would like to see some kind of cap, we could talk about that as well.  We have no problem, because at the end of the day we want to provide a service. 

 

1608    We're not interested in harming anybody.  We think that there's a lot of room here.  The research has shown that people are underserved.  I don't think there's any question about that, and I think the Commission has recognized that in the call.

 

What we've tried to do is give you a proposal that is going to enhance the viewing.  It's going to be of a benefit to all ethnic communities and not a detriment to them.

 

1609    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you.  Another way to look at the programming is third language component, and your brief says 72 hours a week will be third language. 

 

1610    Again, I just want to clarify that number to see if we do agree that it is 72 hours a week.  If we take Schedule 18 which lays things out on a per month basis, it appears to work out to 70 hours a week.  Can you just clarify which it is, 72 or 70?

 

1611    MR. HOLTBY:  I think the number is 70, and it represents --

 

1612    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  7-0?

 

1613    MR. HOLTBY:  70 hours which represents 55.6 percent of the schedule, yes.

 

1614    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So whereas the supplementary brief said 72, it works out to 70 over -- looking at the Schedule 18, so we're off 70.

 

1615    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  There's probably a good reason for why the difference, but I don't know  off the top of my head.  Maybe James does.

 

1616    MR. HO:  Yes.  This is again something that we're building into our programming.  If you take a look at the Schedule 17 there, one of the things that we have -- just give me a second.  One of the things that we have in there is the movie hours.  Just give me one quick second.  Schedule 17.  One of the things that we have built in there is the international ethnic movies there from 4:00 to 6:00 Saturday and Sunday.  In there we do not specify languages, what kind of language.  Within these movies we'll be playing at least two hours of Canadian movies.  In addition to that, we will also be playing the rest of the time ethnic international movies that could be languages other than Chinese, South Asian, could be many different other languages.  We are building room in there, so that's why you see 72 in our supplementary brief.

 

1617    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You inadvertently just struck a chord with me of one of the things that used to irritate me so -- it still does in this country, when I used to find Canadian films in international sections in video stores.  I think I still do, but I used to scream terribly and most rudely, much to my son's chagrin, and when I did -- and not just the French Canadian ones.  My colleagues get going because they know what happens when we --

 

1618    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I didn't know you could scream, Joan.

 

1619    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  When it comes to films --

 

1620    MR. HO:  Just to let you know, there's some very good films that we have been discovering in the last couple of months.  Just to give you one example, the Revallen that we've been watching, it's French produced, sub-titled in English.  It's Canadian content, and my whole family enjoys it.  I mean, it just gives us history.  It's something that we enjoy a lot, and --

 

1621    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  It's wonderful to think that multicultural programming will allow Canadians across the country to discover Quebec cinema.

 

1622    MR. HO:  Yes.  Yes, it is actually good programs.

 

1623    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Why not?

 

1624    MR. HO:  It is a good program that attracts people.

 

1625    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I'm all for that.  Just on the third language, another interesting question which -- I'd like to table it here.  We may find it better to discuss it when we look at studies, but I found it interesting that this level of third language programming may indicate to some readers a focus on a target audience that is first generation as opposed to a younger audience.  We may want to come back to that point when we look at what the studies have told us your target audience will be.  You put an emphasis, Mr. Holtby, on raising audience numbers and counting those audience numbers, which is challenging with this kind of service, but is that a fair statement that overall we're looking at first generation audience for Multivan as opposed to younger audiences, because of this level of third language programming?

 

1626    MR. HO:  I'll start with this, but I can also ask Monika, our chairperson of advisory, as well as Baljit, independent producers that's with our panel, maybe to add something to this.

 

1627    It is our understanding, and through our experience in terms of multicultural broadcasting in this community for the last 20 some years that we found, yes, at the beginning you have a lot of people who do not understand English, and what their primary situation, what they're trying to look for is not only the news from their own home country, which is, you know, in their language, but also what's happening in this community.  And it's happening not just in the first generation, as you know -- I mean, I have my kids that were born in Canada, who are also paying attention  to what's happening in this community here.  Maybe I will let Monika and Baljit elaborate some more.

 

1628    MS. DEOL:  I think it varies according to what your ethnic background is, and I think it varies very much city to city. I was brought up in a small town outside of Winnipeg.  I lived in Toronto for nine years.  I worked in mainstream, you know, mainstream pop culture sort of television there.

 

I came here five years ago.  What I found is that within you know, my people, the Sikhs or the South Asians, it's completely different.  Every place is completely different.  What works in Winnipeg does not work in, you know, Vancouver or Toronto.  What works in the east is not working in the west.  You have very different textures, not just culture to culture, but within one culture.

 

1629    And you're absolutely right.  When I was talking to everybody, I was saying, "You have to keep in mind that on the west coast when it comes to Indians, you have people who came here in 1906, 1908.  You have people who came here like we did, you know, 30, 35 years ago, and you have people who came here five or six years ago.  You have to be relevant to all of them because they're all Indian, they're all Sikh.  they're all Canadian. 

 

1630    What does culture mean to someone like my husband who has never set food in India, but understands the language, married an Indian girl, and whose children speak both.  You know, what does culture mean to friends of mine who have their dad and mom coming next week who don't speak any English.  So you're absolutely right.  I mean, we have to serve a broad section of people, not just in other cultures, but within our own cultures and we have to be relevant to all of them.  So when you talk about that though, you have to know what's happening with your people.  The Filipino people said it was very important that the host spoke both languages.  The Vietnamese people said it didn't matter.

 

1631    So I think it also comes down to what's relevant.  They know what's relevant to their own people, and we will listen to them.  And if it's not working, if we find that there's, you know, a lot of younger people who are phoning or calling and saying, "Look, this is great for my mom and dad, or my grandma, but you know, what about me," well, then we will look at that, and we will change, adjust according to what our viewers want.  But going in, we have to trust the judgment of those people who are, you know, coming up with these shows.  What matters?

 

1632    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Mr. Lee, did you want to add something?

 

1633    MR. LEE:  Yes, I'd like to give an example of myself here.  I'm second generation in Canada, and when my parents came over, my mother couldn't speak English, so my father forced to go to Chinese school.  After school I didn't have an opportunity to play sports like all the rest of the Canadians.  So my children, unfortunately can't speak Chinese.  So I have a sort of a personal thing that I would like, and that is for my children, who want to learn Chinese now - they're in their thirties - and my grandchildren can't speak Chinese, so here's an opportunity for me to somehow education them a little bit about their background, and where my father came from, and that's an opportunity that we want to give to the rest of the population in Canada, whether you're first generation, second generation or even third generation.

 

1634    MR. HO:  Baljit would like to also answer this.

 

1635    MS. SANGRA:  Thank you, James.  In just looking at the schedule, I'm a second generation, South Asian, and I can speak my mother tongue as well.  A lot of these programs would be appealing to me.  There's South Asian/English programming from 9:00 to 10:00.  In the evening there's Table by the Exit, Sounds Right Tonight,  international movies.  I would watch the news.  I think there's a lot here for me; Ethnic Cooking.  There's a lot, you know, in terms of cross-cultural programming that would be appealing to second or third generation.

 

1636    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Would there be a certain kind of programming, a type of programming that is more appealing for a second, third generation South Asian than others?

 

1637    MS. SANGRA:  That's a good question.

 

1638    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  We're talking about television so I --

 

1639    MS. SANGRA:  Yes, television.

 

1640    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And I recognize it's not an easy answer, but just to get a sense of how you're going to approach this challenge of meeting all the interests, beyond language.  You watch television for the kind of programs that are there.  What would work best?

 

1641    MS. SANGRA:  Well, from my experience, I'm finding that a lot of young people are getting quite connected to their culture.  The language is being revived, the dance, performance, the music.  There's a lot of fusion going on.  People are really interested in that.  So I think that's really -- and people are going back to their language a bit.  I know my cousins can all speak Punjabi and we're like third  -- second, third generation.  And the younger kids are really connecting with, you know, they love Bollywood movies.  They love the top ten.  They listen to bangra.  Yeah.  You know, they love American television too.

 

1642    So I think the programming that I see here would be very relevant.  You know, I would love -- like, the news would be appealing to me, because I could watch that with my mom, my grandmother.  But at the same point, Table by the Exit or Sounds Right Tonight, I would like to watch it or maybe be there, you know, at that party.

 

1643    So I think it's all very appealing.  International sports would be appealing to my brother, and my father likes cricket, you know, so I think there's a lot there that's reflective of the younger generation.

 

1644    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you.

 

1645    MR. HO:  And, commissioner, I would like to also just mention very quickly, we have also allocated a programming hour for the children's hour as well.  The Japanese lifestyle, actually, we also have found there's another type of Japanese animations, cartoons, and by this I do not mean the violent type of cartoon, but the Japanese producers and some of the animation, actually who lives here in Vancouver, some of the Japanese animation people actually lives in Vancouver, produces it and send it back to Japan. What they have found is a lot of these programs that they're producing are sort of, more or less, connected to their reality.  Like, they would not have people that can fly out of thin air or anything.  It's different type of cartoon.  They're trying to let us know, let us see what's happening.

 

1646    This Japanese lifestyle program on Sunday morning, it has the flexibility of tailoring to a certain portion of the independent producer that's actually living here doing a lot of animations.  Like I say, that's more geared towards the lifestyle reality of what's happening in the Lower Mainland instead of the violent type, so it's a program for a lot of different generations.

 

1647    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You can see why then we wanted more description of the Lifestyles program, because behind that title are all these choices that will meet, or not, the needs of the communities.  And I take your point that that's a great variety of things. 

 

1648    Just again, I'm back to getting a clear sense of this.  The ethnic program of 86 hours, there is a local component.  A great deal of that's in third language.  There is some English local ethnic programming, is there not?  Can you just clarify what that is?  English local ethnic, certainly some English in the newscast?

 

1649    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

1650    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Are there others?

 

1651    MR. HO:  Yes.  Let me just say that half an hour of the news -- you want to know the news hour, half of the hours will be Punjabi and English.  The South Asian, part will be English.  And then we have Table by the Exit.  That's going to be English.  Sounds Right Tonight, that's English ethnic. Owners Away will be also English ethnic.  And then we have the South Asian Hour in the afternoon, or should I say in the morning, actually, in the morning will be English as well. These are the South Asian hours that will be produced, or Canadian co-produced together, more or less like light drama type of program, that's also will be English and South Asian.

 

1652    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  English local?

 

1653    MR. HO:  English local, yes. 

 

1654    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The non-local ethnic, that's the final element of what I'll call the ethnic programming.  We calculate that there's in the non-local 14 hours Canadian and 12 hours foreign.  Does that jive with what you have?

 

1655    MR. HO:  Foreign ethnic is 12 hours. And what was your first question?

 

1656    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The 14 hours Canadian, non-local.  I understand that to be cooking and light drama.

 

1657    MR. HO:  No, no, the cooking shows are all local as well.

 

1658    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  All right.

 

1659    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

1660    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So what are the 14 hours of non-local Canadian ethnic?

 

1661    MR. HO:  You mean acquired program, acquired Canadian --

 

1662    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The same show can be called different things, but what I'm looking at is the schedule.  It would be acquired under your application, yes.

 

1663    MR. MOY:  Maybe if I can clarify this for everyone, commissioner.  The 14 hours that you're alluding to, the breakdown of that is that there will be approximately - actually will be - three hours of what we're calling Canadian acquired, and then the rest of the 11 hours of the 14 hours, we are hoping -- we're calling it local, and we're saying that perhaps we can do a co-production with an independent producer, or if the opportunity arises, perhaps we can, you know, work with other Canadian broadcasters, are the various opportunities that we will be exploring.  And that's something that I think Doug maybe can explain to you.

 

1664    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  What kind of program are we talking about?

 

1665    MR. MOY:  We are talking about one hour -- the three hours that will be Canadian acquired will be one hour of the Dutch, two hours of the Portuguese, and then for ethnic cooking, that's five hours.  For the South Asian at nine o'clock in the morning, that's another five hours, and then we also have the Greek program, which is one hour.

 

1666    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So that's what's listed in Schedule 17, revised under acquired and co-production listing.

 

1667    MR. MOY:  Yes.

 

1668    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So some of  the component of the Lifestyles would be produced with producers as we described earlier, some could be under this acquired co-production list?

 

1669    MR. MOY:  That's correct.

 

1670    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  But they end up to be the magazine type one-hour shows.  What are we talking about in terms of the kind of programming?  Are we talking drama?  Are we talking a magazine?  Are we talking news?

 

1671    MR. MOY:  It depends.  I should refer you to the page.  Page 113 of our application outlines to you what we envision as perhaps co-production and local, and of, again the 14 hours that I mentioned earlier, the Greek is similar to their Lifestyles program that we mentioned.

 

1672    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.

 

1673    MR. MOY:  Dutch and Portuguese as well.  Ethnic cooking is self-explanatory, and South Asia is light drama is what we're hoping for.

 

1674    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  So we are talking about the 14.  That's where we got it too, from that Schedule 17.

 

1675    MR. MOY:  Yes, that is the 14 hours, that's correct.

 

1676    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The 12 hours foreign is interesting.  You've got Hindi drama, drama and Mandarin, or comedy in Mandarin or Cantonese, the sports which will be in English, and the movies.  Just in terms of why you chose to add those elements to the schedule, can you expand on why you thought that would be interesting?  I think we've touched on the movies and the sports for your brother, but generally speaking, this idea of including foreign non-local -- or foreign ethnic - I'm repeating myself here - programming, why did you decide to do that?

 

1677    MR. HO:  One of the areas we also found that a lot of people in the first generation here, they would like to still go back to see some of the great movies or great dramas that have been produced in their home country, and we wanted to allocate certain hours there for their viewing as well.  We did not want to leave them out, considering they may have certain language barrier here.  And we have picked these two being the half an hour each day for the South Asian, half an hour a day for the Chinese, Monday through Friday, the type of light drama, comedy.  It could be a very short series, or it could be a longer series will be viewed between these hours.

 

1678    Again, when we look at these, we want to make sure these hours are not competing again with an existing service that's being aired at this moment.  That's why you see them in these hours and the things behind it.

 

1679    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  When you talk about existing services, what services are you referring to?

 

1680    MR. HO:  I'm referring to Shaw Multicultural as well as the specialty TV.

 

1681    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Specialty.

 

This was my question.  Do you not feel that this would have an impact on the ethnic specialty services which are, in fact, built -- some, built on international film and so on.  Do you feel that the impact will be severe on these services?

 

1682    MR. HO:  Well, for sure we'll have certain impacts on the TV station, but I would say that our impact will not only go to the specialty TV, but you know, it's going to affect everybody: mainstream TV, as well as the specialty, and not just limited to the ethnic such as Fairchild or TalentVision.  We will affect them, but to what extent?  Is it a huge major impact?  I don't think so in this situation.  And one of the things very simply said is, when we look at all these programming that we're doing, a lot of our programming is geared to what's local, what's happening in our surrounding in the Lower Mainland, and it is not in competition with what they have been doing. 

 

1683    Take, for instance, the news hour, and our drama hour, I can provide you with one example.  We have no intention to put the drama on the prime hour like what Fairchild has done.  As a matter of fact, some of the news, say, for instance, the news hour, it could be entertainment news and we can go into say, you know this type of drama, let's say a drama name being, you know, Chinese Home Alone becomes a good hit in far east, and we can just mention a little bit about it in our news.  And who has been playing that?  Our competitor's playing it. So people would be switching over to their TV and watching that kind of drama program because we did not allow ourselves, or wanted to view -- or air that kind of program because most of our programming, like I say, is geared towards the local community needs demand and it's going to be produced locally.  If we're going to have any drama that's going to be produced, you know, it would be most likely in the South Asian hour from 9:00 to 10:00, and it could be independent producer or co-produced together in the South Asian hour. It's totally different.  This is what I'm saying, you know.  It's complementing, you know.  Everything that we do, the first thing that I have made sure, or we have made sure is that we want it to be a complementing service, broaden the hours so everybody can enjoy.

 

1684    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you.  Just before we leave the ethnic programming, I wanted you to comment on the appropriateness of the 86 hours of local ethnic programming per week becoming a condition of licence.  Do you have a comment on that?

 

1685    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, the Commission has our commitment that we will launch the service with 86 hours a week.  Now, we recognize the problems that some ethnic stations have had.  We think that -- I personally believe that in the fullness of time that an ethnic station should be an ethnic station.  And what we've got to do is we have to find ways of measuring -- first off, we have to find ways of delivering programs that the ethnic communities are going to watch.  I mean, it's got to be top quality. 

 

1686    Secondly then, we've got to measure that and then sell that to advertisers.  Our commitment to the Commission is to start with 68 percent.  We would want some flexibility.  We would still be higher at 60 percent than any ethnic station in this country.  So we say we'll exceed it.  Our plan is to start with 68.  We think we can make that work with the schedule that you have in front of you, but we obviously don't want to create a -- you know, we want to have some flexibility if there's a problem arising.

 

1687    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  The 68 was the same as the 86, just so we don't get confused.  I said 86 hours --

 

1688    MR. HOLTBOY:  Yes.  I was talking percentages, and you were talking hours.

 

1689    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Hours.

 

1690    MR. HOLTBY:  I'm having trouble with these numbers, too.

 

1691    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you. Andrew, that really helped, 86, 68.

 

1692    Before we complete the programming, there is the non-ethnic component, the other 40 hours a week, and I think at this point though, we can take a break, and we'll complete that and then do independent production and the demand studies.  So if you'd like, this is the time to take a bit of a breather.

 

1693    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner Pennefather, if you'll allow me to ask a question about news.

 

1694    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Sure.

 

1695    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I am not a broadcaster, but I'm learning through various hearings, et cetera.  I remain puzzled about what the local component of newscasts will be.  Will it just be news,  so and so was robbed, or so and so won the mayoralty election, or will there be more in it, or will that be somewhere else, like in your Lifestyles programming? 

 

1696    One of the things I have learned recently, because when we renewed the large players in the industry, CTV Global, there is, as you know, a concern expressed that local programming is disappearing from these stations, so we focus on what is local programming.  And going down the list of programs, I saw various things that looked good to me for attaching yourself to the community, being engaging, and I thought, well, that's disappearing.  No, no, no, it's not, it's in the newscast.  And there would be things like -- I don't remember them so I made them up, and if you like them I won't charge you for them.  It would be something like, Today's Sunshine Child in West Vancouver, every day or once a week in the news, and then The Most Active Sikh Elderly Lady in Surrey, or Parenting Chinese-Canadian Toddlers in Richmond.  I hope I have these communities right.  And to my surprise, this was in the newscasts, and the answer was, well, no, it's not disappearing, that local component that attaches you to the community and makes it feel it's their station - and this could be in Ottawa, this can be in a large city - was actually counted as local news. 

 

1697    Where is this type of thing, if it's done, where will it be in your newscast; in the Lifestyles, or could it be in the newscast?  I'm trying to figure out what proportion, because both applicants will be local and a large amount of their local programming is news, and we asked about ratios.  "Well, it's not going to be the same today, and it's not going to be the same tomorrow," but what is going to be there, just news, or will there be some of this engaging material that reflects a community because it's very local?  You know, it's Parenting Toddlers on 42nd Street, or whatever, which comes up regularly and people supply this to the station.  Is there going to be some of that, and where, is more my question.  Where's that going to be? 

 

1698    I didn't ask the question yesterday of the other one because I didn't think about it, but is that possibly going to be in the newscasts?  I have trouble when I look at the number of hours of local programming and say, well, what is going to be in there.

 

1699    MR. HOLTBY:  Madam Chair, if you look at a newscast, and I share your view that news isn't all bad news.

 

1700    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Not just bad news, maybe the most elderly Sikh lady is only 35.  That's not good news, is it?  I mean something other than at such and such an hour this place burned down.

 

1701    MR. HOLTBY:  That's what I'm getting at.  It's sensational.  You're talking about lifestyle stories.  And one of the successes in my prior life at BCTV, their hour news, it had lifestyle features every day, and it would be as simple as going and talking to some kids that were on the street playing broomball or whatever.  They've done research, and it's one of the most important components of that newscast.  And obviously we have a real challenge with serving 22 different communities in 22 languages.  And your point is well taken, and you have to have that kind of material, the lifestyle, the human interest, the reflection of the community back to itself.  In the case of Chinese and South Asian, it has to be part of the component of the newscast, there's no question about that.

 

1702    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I was more practical than you think.  I didn't think that in the Chinese story you would have something a about a Sikh old lady.  You know, it'll have to be relevant if you're doing Chinese news.  But my question was more, what's going to be in there that will be relevant?

 

1703    MR. HOLTBY:  But there's cross-cultural stories as well.  There's celebrations that go on in the South Asian community, or the Chinese community, or these other communities that are of interest. I go with my family to them myself and, frankly, a lot of them are covered in the mainstream media as well, the dragon boat races, those kinds of things.

 

1704    We want to reflect the community back to itself.  We're going to be very responsive, and as we've said, one of the cornerstones of this application is we've got a 13-member advisory council, volunteers that are doing this for a love of city and love of their cultures, their communities.

 

1705    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, but Mr. Holtby, the reality and the practices, your people, your staff's going to be programming the station.  I can see the advisory council, but I fail to see how Senator Carney or Lucy Roschat's going to tell you, "It would be a great idea if you did this."  I mean, it will be up to the station and its staff to provide a context, and say if you have these vignettes every day or once a week, or whatever, people will provide them to you from the outside.  You don't have to do it from in-house, but the advisory council, I suspect, is going to tell you what the community wants, but you have to convince us that you know what you're doing in the more every minute and every day business.

 

1706    MR. HOLTBY:  It's consultation and advice that we will be seeking, and I can assure you Madam Chair, I've got to know this council now over the last seven months, and I can assure you that they're no shrinking violets and if they --

 

1707    MS. DEOL:  We don't have a wallflower among us.

 

1708    THE CHAIRPERSON:  No, but they are not going to find that sick lady or that sunshine child.

 

1709    MS. DEOL:  Oh, yes, we are.  That is what -- no, no, no.

 

1710    THE CHAIRPERSON:  The advisory council?

 

1711    MS. DEOL:  The advisory council, believe me, these people are sick of my opinions.  Like, that's exactly what I'm saying, is that when I talk to them, I said, "Look, you guys have to be relevant to more than just someone who doesn't speak English, because culture is not just language.  It's not just how you dress.  Culture is a mindset.  It's an attitude to your life.  That is what culture is."  And when you have a news hour, okay, I think that's a perfect time to talk about the culture clash that we have all gone through.  We have gone through, "Well, why does it matter if I speak my language"; "Why can't I go out at night when all the other kids do?"  Geoffrey has dealt with his kids saying, "Well, guess what, I have a non-Chinese boyfriend," you know.  Bob was talking about how his kids don't speak the language.  I mean these are all issues that we all talk about every day in our everyday lives.  They matter to us, where are our people going.

 

1712    THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes.  I understand that, but these are --

 

1713    MS. DEOL:  So in the hour-long newscast, that's a perfect time to do stories, you know, to get the different points of view, to get people talking.  Those are human interest stories that you're not going to see on, you know, a mainstream newscast.  They don't have the time worry about our culture clashes with our parents, or why does it matter that my kids speak the language, or know anything about being Indian when their father hasn't been to India. I mean, these are all things that can be part of that hour-long newscast that are human interest stories, along with celebrating - celebrating just who we are in everyday life.

 

1714    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Those type of vignettes, that approach, that creation of a context that allows a community to participate, may well be within those hours of newscasts --

 

1715    MS. DEOL:  Absolutely.

 

1716    THE CHAIRPERSON:  -- as opposed to in the Lifestyles?  That's the answer to the question I was asking.

 

1717    MR. HO:  Madam Chair, just let me give you once quick example.  Being local here is not just being local.  Being local here means that we are relevant, we are responsible, we are accountable, and we have our ears and eyes to the pulse of the community.  Let me just give you one very surprising information that we found out being here.  Scandinavian, for example.  When we did this program, we look into it.  I say, "Why does anybody want to do Scandinavian?  They are not anywhere.  They are not on Shaw.  They've been asked to leave because they don't have enough viewers".  But, guess what?  We found out if you combined all the Scandinavian people, all the people living in the Lower Mainland, there are about 120,000 of them.  Now, that's not a small number.  So we came out with a different program schedule for them.  So we're going to have Danish, Norwegian, Finnish and Swedish.  We also found out this is what we can broadcast in the news hour, because it is a huge changing trend that we are noticing our own community that's going to affect the rest of the community.

 

1718    Guess what?  Some of the children that's born, the third generation children that's born in this part of the world, they're starting to learn their own language, and the number has jumped four-fold in the last three years.  It's amazing.  And it's going to be an interesting news item.  Of course this is cross-culture that we'd be talking about.  And guess what?  We're going to promote that program, Scandinavian Lifestyle, on Saturday morning.  We're going to tell them.  We're going to show you more about this, what's happening to this situation, watch this Scandinavian lifestyle.  So there's going to be a cross-promotion.

 

1719    I think the news is not just, like you say, like everybody's saying, just simply the news,  because a lot of news will be covered by what's happening in your community.  That's the trend, what's happening here.  So if you want to know more, go to these Lifestyles, you know, and we'll have a small segment of that and tell you a little more detail about it, but a lot of it's perhaps not newsworthy or news relevant type of hour, but watch it during that time.

 

This is the type of situation we will also pay close attention.

 

1720    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for that.  Thank you, Commissioner Pennefather for indulging me.

 

1721    When we say we're going to be local and then newscasts are counted as local completely, it's made up of international, national and local news,  the question remains, what is in there.  And as I say, I was surprised to find out that things that are not really news, but are lifestyle interest stories that engage a community were indeed in the newscast.  Then the question of, is there just a little bit of local news and a lot of national news becomes clearer as to what's in there, so thank you for the clarification.

 

1722    MR. SEGAL:  Madam Chair, just before we leave the subject à propos the question that you raised vis-à-vis the board that we have, the voluntary board, advisory board.

 

1723    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I'm joining it. 

 

I found the job for my retirement.  Stick my nose into everything.

 

1724    MR. SEGAL:  No, but I think it was a very good question.  I assume that the board appreciates the fact that we went to a great deal of trouble to select an advisory board that will not be a token board, that is a responsive board and has the ability to network within this community and provide to us the advice that we need to fill the needs in the community and build a successful television station.

 

1725    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I hope Commissioner Cardozo's taking notes because he'll be discussing that further with you.  We'll now take a break and we'll be back in 10  minutes.  Thank you.

 

 

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1025 / Suspension à 1025

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1035 / Reprise à 1035

 

 

 

1726    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner Pennefather, please.

 

1727    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you.   Back to our questions on programming, and we'll look at the block of non-ethnic programming, the 40 hours a week.  Mr. Ho?

 

1728    MR. HO:  Can I just -- sorry.

 

1729    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Go ahead.

 

1730    MR. HO:  I just want to make a little bit of a correction here.  The programming that we're just mentioning about the program about ethnic, English ethnic --

 

1731    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.

 

1732    MR. HO:  --  Sounds Right Tonight, I mentioned it's English.  Actually part of it will be bilingual as well.  In other words, part of the program could be aired during the hour English as well as certain bilingual, some other ethnic language in there.

 

1733    And then I also mentioned about international movies.  We have allocated international movies there not just for the international, but also, you know, it is not our intention to categorize Canadian movie to be in the international side, but that's just the room.   We cannot say international, Canadian, or Canadian international.  So we rather use the name because it's a better reflection, but we're also building the rooms to have Canadian movies in there as well.  So I just wanted to clarify these two points.  Thank you.

 

1734    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you for that.  I guess as we sort all this out it will become clear.  Basically the overview of this is to get a sense of how the program schedule and the programs you're choosing really meet the needs of the audiences you're proposing to reach, and how it's complementary, since you state quite a bit of your argument on the complementarities not just of the scheduling, but of the content.

 

1735    So I think that's helpful and I think the discussion with the Chair was also very important in terms of understanding what's on the screen in the final analysis.  Actually, we'll come back to that at the end just to wrap up a little bit the various pieces of the puzzle, but there is a very large component we're going to touch on now, which is the big blocks called English on the schedule.  Some of it is ethnic, but a lot of it is non-ethnic, 40 hours a week, and I have some questions which are related to your letter dated July 30th in response to deficiency questions,  so I'll repeat what's in there just so you know where I'm getting this information.

 

1736    On page 2 of that letter you state that the English block periods will contain Canadian and foreign acquired English programming.  Can you provide the Commission with any further details about how much of this programming would be Canadian and, in addition, could you provide any further information as to what the Canadian programming would consist of?

 

1737    MR. HOLTBY:  I'm sorry, Commissioner,  is that a question that was in the letter, or is that a question --

 

1738    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  It's an expansion on your response in the letter, Question 1, paragraph 2.

 

1739    MR. HOLTBY:  Okay.

 

1740    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  "We'll acquire the best program titles available from Canadian and U.S. distributors."  So we assume Canadian -- what are the Canadian programs that you're talking about?

 

1741    MR. HOLTBY:  For purposes of the application, we've identified the entire 40 hours as American for our calculations, but we recognize that there is now being produced some fabulously quality Canadian programs, and there's some good strip programs in Canadian, and as James just talked about, movies that are Canadian.  Of course those are all subject to rights issues and we now see Canadian going through various windows, you know, from theatres to television and now to pays and now to repeat pay systems, but our intention would be to acquire some Canadian so we could broadcast it.  That gives us some added flexibility in doing some other things, perhaps some additional foreign ethnic, if we have some Canadian in that time block, so there's some benefits to the television station.

 

1742    As far as the American goes, we've identified in the application expressions of interest from CHUM and Craig, that would be willing to work with us.  We have also, since the filing of the application, we have been in discussions with CTV, and they would make product available to us, and obviously since we are in the same business, but not competing with each other, should we be successful, we would certainly work with CFMT as well.

 

1743    I think Global has some national rights product that they like to lay off.  I think the Commission's is well aware that some of the bigger companies get forced upon them product that they don't necessarily want or need, so there's a benefit to everybody.  Of course we'll deal with distributors as well.

 

1744    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Just to go back to the beginning then.  You've run through the whole picture.  So if I understand, you don't have any precise information on what kind of Canadian programs that you were talking about for potential acquisition?

 

1745    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I've got some --

 

1746    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You seem to say it's all American, but maybe some Canadian.  Do you have any idea of what kind of Canadian programming you would be looking for?

 

1747    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I think the first  programs that would likely be made available would be some movies.  I mean, I would personally love to see a show like SCTV on the service.  I mean, I was involved in that.  I was executive producer.  There was 185 half hours.  But that show, I think, has been sold to the comedy networks.  So there's rights issues, what's available.  But each year we're creating more inventory, and there's a lot of, as you well know, there's a lot of Canadian product available, and we would like to take advantage of that and buy some of that for broadcast, and then that gives us some additional flexibility to perhaps get some foreign ethnic in the schedule as well.

 

1748    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Leaving aside the business side of this for the moment, I have to say that the demand studies are clear that your viewers, the ethnic viewers, are going to be watching programming mostly in the evening, and we could get back to challenge that if you like, but that's what your research studies are telling us in the Ipsos Reid study.  I would have thought that since we are saying that this programming block in the evening will be watched by your ethnic viewers, that you would be steered in your choice of programming by that audience.

 

And so I was wondering, wouldn't you find it interesting to get some Canadian programming in that mix in the evening?  I recognize there's a business side here, and we'll get to that and what some of the real bottom line issues are in this programming block, but wouldn't you have some programming incentive to include Canadian product in this block, even though I recognize there's a business angle to this, considering that this is where most of your ethnic viewers are going to be watching you.

 

1749    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, a show that comes to mind is a show like DeGrassi, which would clearly fit in.  I thought what your question was, have you identified which show that you would be buying.  You know, we haven't gone that far and there certainly is rights issues, but clearly what our intention is, is to have programming that reflects to the community.  We have made a commitment that, wherever possible, we will purchase programs that will have a positive portrayal of ethnics, and be reflective of those communities wherever we can.  We're well aware of some discussions that went on yesterday, but we made this commitment in our application. 

 

1750    As far as the Canadian goes, it's going to be a matter of rights, but it would our intention to acquire some Canadian, and I've given you some examples, like DeGrassi would just be, to me, would be superb.  It would fit as far as time period.  We have to be sensitive to that as well.  The schedule is between 6:00 and eight o'clock at night, so there's certainly a lot of strip product that you wouldn't ever broadcast during that time period.  It wouldn't be appropriate for that time period.

 

1751    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I do recognize some of the business plan issues that are related to this, and my colleague will be pursuing that in greater detail, but the point of my comment was really that how the overall programming philosophy of the vision that Multivan is putting together would come to bear even in face of those economic issues on this very significant block of programming.

 

1752    You mentioned rights.  Looking at the nitty-gritty now of this block, it is, we recognize, sometimes difficulty for regional broadcasters to obtain the rights to foreign English programming, since other broadcasters with larger or even national distribution networks can easily surpass regional bids and obviously programs are bought, national rights are bought.  Could you comment on Multivan's purchasing power and whether you anticipate problems in the acquisition of rights with respect to the type of programming you're looking for, Canadian and foreign?

 

1753    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, as the Commission is well aware, the big conventional broadcasters, Global, CTV, CBC to a small extent now, and CHUM now, and I think with the decision yesterday that they'll be even a bigger player, they buy national rights for the product that they want to broadcast.  We all go down to Los Angeles at the same time, and historically it's been the CBC.  They would get first pick because nobody could bid against CBC, but the big players, they buy their product, and as I mentioned to you, there are instances where a network would want to buy a couple of shows from an American supplier, and that supplier will package that up with a strip.

 

1754    This is one of the big problems that we had at CTV.  I was on the board of CTV, as you know, and CTV would want to buy ER for example, and the distributor would say, "Well, if you want ER, we want you to buy this strip," and they would force it on them.  And that's why when CTV bought, it actually bought more product, ended up having more product that it needed for the network, and it would sell that off and the stations ended up buying some of that.

 

1755    So the main players, conventional players, get first pick.  What we would be doing, of course, if we couldn't end up with any kind of an association with anybody, we would end up buying after all of those.  We couldn't compete against Global for a strip show.  It's not possible as a local broadcaster.

 

1756    But my experience in television goes back to 1974, and when we got our television station in Edmonton in '74, there was no local independent in Vancouver or Calgary or Winnipeg at that time.  We ended up buying after the networks and did quite well, and we ended up creating a consortium that would buy product along with Global and CHCH. 

 

1757    So what I see happening with this station is that if the decision is in our favour the first call that this company would make would be to CFMT to work with them, because we're in the same business and we don't compete with them.

 

1758    When we launched our statement in Edmonton in '74, I think the first television that Izzy Asper was in was our station.  When he got his licence, he came and we helped him, gave him some advice on how to launch his station in Winnipeg.  That happened after.  And so I would think the first call we would make would be to CFMT to see what product we could work with.  We have a commitment from our friends at CITY and also with Craig that they would work with us, and also with CTV. 

 

1759    I know all of the principals of all of those companies, and the bottom line is, if they have inventory that they own the rights to, to Vancouver, and they don't have an outlet or a use for it, they would want to sell it off, and I see absolutely no issue at all, no problem at all for this station to survive.

 

1760    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So, in sum, if I understand, you're saying that as a regional broadcaster, you will have a challenge to acquire rights to this kind of programming which will support 80 percent of your advertising revenue.  So what you've turned to, if I follow you are agreements with Craig and CHUM.  Are these written agreements?

 

1761    MR. HOLTBY:  We have letters from them, and also a letter from CTV.  The problem that MVBC would face would be no different than the problem that CFMT faces today.  They are a stand-alone, for all intents and purposes, have been for many years a stand-alone multilingual station, and they buy product from Global.  They buy a lot of product that Global has the rights for, and they buy it for their market, and I understand from what they said yesterday they buy some national rights. 

 

1762    Well, if they have national rights, with the licensing of MVBC in this market, it gives them another outlet to sell to.  Obviously, they've got others.  They could sell to KVOS, that I guess, as I understand, they are doing, but they would have a Canadian alternative, and I think, Commissioner, that they would be selling to us.  We would be doing things together.  It just makes sense.  In the news area back -- I'm going back in history, because I'm a little bit of a dinosaur, I guess, in the broadcast industry, but when we had our independent station we had no way of getting Ottawa news.

 

1763    We were an independent station in Western Canada and there was no others, and so we worked with both CITY and CHCH, who compete in the same market at the time, but we created a new service called Satellite Independent News which the three of us funded, and we set up a bureau in Ottawa to get Ottawa news so we could look after our viewers, and that's what you do.  Even though there was no common ownership between those three companies, even though CITY and CHCH competed with each other in the same market for advertisers, we cooperated, because it was all in our vested best interests.

 

1764    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So again, you recognize the challenge to a regional broadcaster in terms of obtaining rights for the kind of strip programming that you're likely to try to schedule in those blocks, so you have these arrangements with Craig and CHUM and you say CTV as well?

 

1765    MR. HOLTBY:  CTV.

 

1766    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And Ethnic Canadian Broadcasters, anything confirmed at this point, anything --

 

1767    MR. HOLTBY:  No.  For obvious reasons, we haven't sat down with the people at CFMT to talk about how we could work together, but I have every confidence that that would happen.  When you say a challenge, I mean, clearly it's not as easy to run a local television station as it would be if you cover 90 percent of the country.  I mean, you'd just have such a bigger base to play from, a bigger yard, and obviously more money to pay on a per hourly basis.  But there's lots of programs available.  There's lots of strip available.  As I pointed out, there are distributors that can't get it placed in this country, so they force it on you.  I mean, the last thing CTV wanted was to, in those days, is to get their hands on the strip that they had no place to broadcast it, but they had to do that to acquire shows that were important for them on their schedule. 

 

1768    Business is a challenge, but at the end of the day every broadcaster cooperates, and unless they compete head-to-head, you know, we're not competition with CFMT, and we're really not in direct competition with CTV and others.  In fact, they have not indicated that at all.  In my conversation with Ivan Fassan, he sees this as very much a complementary service to what they're providing here.  They're mainstream television and he recognizes this is multilingual.

 

1769    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That's the point I want to pursue with you, the diversity that this programming may or may not offer to the market.  I'm sure that Commissioner Wilson will pursue it from the angle of the effect that the situation will have on your revenues.  This is the component of the day that is going to pull in, I think it's 80 percent or so of your revenues.  

 

1770    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1771    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That is the model that we're looking at, a model that is a challenging one, but there it is.  But from the point of view of the kind of programming we're talking about, and we can guess what some of those titles might be, how will what you program in this time frame add diversity to what's available in the market, to our ethnic viewers or to mainstream viewers for that matter?

 

1772    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, when we look at what's available on the dial here - we're talking the 6:00 to 8:00 and the 10:00 to 12:00 time periods - if you look at what's available in Vancouver, all of the Canadian conventional services and all of the conventional American networks have news at six o'clock.  Well, there are people out there that are not terribly in news and it's quite a big block.  There's a lot of people, as you were told yesterday, and they have outlets now with specialty services and other options if they want to watch television.  We think we can deliver a schedule that will attract them to our station and, of course, obviously our hope would be do some simulcast if that could be done.

 

1773    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So simulcast.  So in other words, yes, I recognize the point the programming from 5:00 to 8:00, and particularly the 5:00 to 6:00, or 6:00 to 7:00, that's already being done, where rather than watch the news, one can watch the Simpson's or Frasier or whatever.  That's usually what turns up in those hours.  How is what you're going to program in that time frame different?  It's the same model, but how will the shows available be different, and how will they meet the interests of your ethnic viewers, or do you worry about that?

 

1774    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, clearly, we would want to create a schedule that would be of interest to everyone, but the reality is that depending on which ethnic community you're talking about, and whether it's first generation or second or third, whether or not its interest is, you know, varies.  What are we offering differently than already available?  Well, first off, we'd be offering it on a Canadian service.  It would be strip that would be available on a Canadian service.  It wouldn't necessarily be the same strip that's coming over from FOX or from KVOS.  That issue will only be dealt with once you establish what the rights are and who owns them and what it costs, but it is clearly an alternative to currently what's available.  I mean, I guess the question that we could ask back is what else is available?  The reality is to attract an audience you can either do it with strip or first-run American or movies.  Well, you know, CHUM, as you well know, has tied the movie business up, and they now have two outlets in Greater Vancouver, and they're in the movie business.

 

1775    In the first-run American, we've talked about that availability of first-run American.  The reality is Global have two outlets here that they're differentiating, CTV, when you get past those, there's not a lot of product out there, and they're strip.  And one thing about strip is the consistency of viewing, that people know at six o'clock there is that particular show that interests them.  It would not make programming sense to do four days of a strip, and then have one hour of a first-run show, for example, if you were able to get a first-run show.

 

1776    So we are providing diversity through additional viewing options to the public.  We have said that we will be, wherever possible, we'll be sensitive to our ethnic communities, and try and find some reflection back, and I mentioned DeGrassi, and there's others too.  It was mentioned yesterday the Cosby Show, even though it's American culture, but we're very sensitive to that.  But you're absolutely right, it comes down to that's where the meat and potatoes are today.  I think, in the fullness of time, if we do our job right, that we're going to be less reliant on American. 

 

1777    When I started in broadcasting 20 years ago, nobody thought you could ever make money on Canadian.  Well, that in fact is not the case now.  I mean, the most important show on BCTV is their news hour.  They have a larger audience with that show than any other show, the top American, whatever.  It's very relevant.  They do a very good job, and again we see now Canadian hours that are done that are attracting big audiences.  And so I think in the fullness of time, we're going to see exactly the same thing happen with ethnic broadcasting.  If ethnic broadcasters do a good job and provide relevant, informative product that people want to watch, then I think that the ethnic programming will eventually be able to stand on its own.

 

1778    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I recognize that, but we are talking about the nitty-gritty of this block, and as you, yourself, have just said, this goes back to my point about - and I couldn't let you get away with that - it's why you wouldn't acquire Canadian programming when you, yourself, said it is now probably more lucrative than it was.  But I take your points.  I was just trying to get a sense of what the shows will be that you would go for in that time frame and how they would add diversity for mainstream audiences as well to the market, because the effect of that block of programming is on the market as a whole, and what's available here in, understandably, a very changing market.

 

1779    I'd like to turn to the question of the independent sector and go back over all the programming from the point of view of your relationship with the independent sector, so if we circle back to some of the same questions, you'll understand it's from the angle of understanding what that relationship is, specifically, and in as much detail as possible. And that will bring us back, for example, to the Lifestyles programming and how it works.  I'll be referring to your supplementary brief and to the July 30th letter again.

 

1780    In your supplementary brief, in several places, page 3, page 12, page 19, for example, you talk about your commitment to work with the independent producers, particularly from the deep pool of highly qualified Vancouver producers. You talk about the wealth of talent, the wealth of local talent.  You say that Vancouver's blessed with an abundance of talent.  Now, one would assume from these statements that your schedule would offer many opportunities for work with the independent sector, and I think today we've heard a little bit more which clarifies this, but it was surprising that not until the July 30th letter did we get any indication of how much of that production would be undertaken by the independent sector.   And in that letter you talked about the 16 percent, and in your presentation yesterday, and again this morning, you mentioned 10  hours.  So where we're at now is that you're talking about 16 percent of your schedule, 10  hours per week being undertaken by the independent sector; is that correct?

 

1781    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.  I think it's important that we understand what we're referring to with independent producers.

 

1782    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  That's my next question.

 

1783    MR. HOLTBY:  I'm getting a little confused listening to it.  It's a different --

 

1784    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, why don't you then take us through that?  There's a couple questions.  Who are we talking about, and how do you define a local independent producer?  And then we'll look at the different ways you will associate yourself with the independent community and your schedule.  So if you want to then clarify for us, what do you mean by independent producer?

 

1785    MR. HOLTBY:  I think we want to talk about the global definition - not the global Global definition - the small G global definition of independent producer. What we did was we identified and our deficiencies shows that fall under the industry understanding of what an independent producer.  It's where the independent producer owns the copyright, exploits the product, and moves it on, and we identified some shows that would fall into that category.

 

1786    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So, to be clear, you're talking about Yoga and You, Tai Chi, Mind and Body, Ethnic Cooking, Table by the Exit, Sounds Right Tonight --

 

1787    MR. HOLTBY:  And we also --

 

1788    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  (Indiscernible) would be produced by independent producers who will end up owning the rights to these programs?

 

1789    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct, and also perhaps even some movies as well.  I think we also mentioned that as well. 

 

1790    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Who will pay then for these?  Who will cover the costs of these programs?

 

1791    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, with an independent producer, that's part of the job of being an independent producer.  If you want to own the copyright, you have to provide whatever funding that's there, find the sources for the funding.

 

1792    Now, in the case of those particular shows, what we have done is we have recognized the entire cost of producing those shows in our financials.  But the reality is, if an independent producer wants to own the copyright, he would likely have other avenues, and other investors, and he would own the copyright, and potentially other markets.  For example, the movie, we wouldn't support, and we couldn't support the entire cost of a movie, and that would be a situation where we would be providing, you know, high licence fees and perhaps even some equity, if it was required for the independent producer.

 

1793    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Just before we go down the road to far, if you talk about the independent production community, the first step is you're saying an independent producer, as we understand it globally, are you talking about those independent producers who are local in the terms you defined, local in our other conversations, the Greater Vancouver area, or are you talking about British Columbia?

 

1794    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, that's where it gets a little confusing.  What we did was we identified, I think, 25 independent producers that, as I said earlier, have other careers and that's their profession and -- it's one of their professions as producers.  Some of them that's their only profession.

 

1795    Baljit's involved in some big productions that are coming over from South Asia.  And we've identified those producers, and many of those producers have indicated that they would like to be involved in providing the local content and producing the local content for the show, or for the schedule.

 

1796    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.

 

1797    MR. HOLTBY:  So the independent producer that we identified from the Italian community may very well produce the Italian show.  But the reality is that is a local show.  It doesn't have any relevance, probably any sale outside of Vancouver.  So they would be looking for us to fund it all to pay for their work.  But I still consider those an independent producer.  They're not an independent producer from a conventional broadcasting perspective, but this isn't conventional broadcasting, and when you're running a television station you can have five or six producers in your television station that can do a number of things.

 

1798    In ethnic broadcasting that would not be a proper or realistic way of operating the station, because you have a producer like myself who's English-speaking and I was born here, but how would I possibly be able to interpret and produce a show that's relevant for the Vietnamese community?  It's not possible.

 

1799    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I understand.

 

1800    MR. HOLTBY:  So what we're saying is we will have producers that obviously will do our day- to-day, our news, information and those shows.

 

1801    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  So let's go through it that way.  The news component, is that produced in-house?

 

1802    MR. HOLTBY:  That would be all in- house.  It would be our people that would be producing the news.

 

1803    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So the news is the First Chinese News, the First South Asian News, which is repeated twice, original, and 7-7-7-7?

 

1804    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1805    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And it's all produced in-house.

 

1806    MR. HOLTBY:  And in that case we've also said that they will be separate editors and separate news directors because, again, we don't think that a news director that has, you know, has a Chinese flavour and is able to deliver what is relevant to the Chinese community can necessarily do a good job on the South Asian or vice versa, so we've said they'll be separate.  So we will actually have separate producers.  That's unheard of in conventional broadcasting.  That's a good example.  You would have a news director and you would have -- you know, he'd be responsible, could be responsible, for three or four different newscasts.

 

1807    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  This relates as well, in terms of how this is working to the Chair's earlier question, so let's go through it a little more slowly.

 

1808    MR. HOLTBY:  Sure.

 

1809    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The news component, the Chinese news, you say it will be produced in-house.  So on staff you will have the camera persons and the writers and the editors and those out with the cameras and crews to pick up the stories.

 

1810    MR. HOLTBY:  Absolutely.

 

1811    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You will also have news editors who will decide how the package is finally put together.  Are you saying as well, that you will have on staff editors from different communities who can also add a flavour to the Chinese news which would interest that community?

 

1812    MR. HOLTBY:  There's no question that there's going to be a sharing of stories and information between all of the producers.  I would think that if we use an example of the Vietnamese producer for example, and that could be a story that's very relevant for the Chinese or South Asian newscast.  It's a melting pot in the station, and I would see them exchanging that information with those.

 

1813    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.

 

1814    The next step then, is we take the Lifestyles programs.  These, on the other hand, will be produced by independent producers, and I'm assuming they are some, if not all, or even more of the list of 25 included in your application are the ones we're talking about, independent producers, local independent producers who will prepare the Lifestyles programs.  They will produce them and you will pay for the entire program?

 

1815    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.

 

1816    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And that's in your expenses, your operating expenses?

 

1817    MR. HOLTBY:  All those shows have been fully budgeted out, yes.

 

1818    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And who will retain the rights for those shows?

 

1819    MR. HOLTBY:  I mean, if a producer wished to own the rights, I don't think we would have a problem with that.  As I said earlier, I don't really think that they will have relevance outside of the Lower Mainland, but that's just something that, you know, we're very flexible in that regard.

 

1820    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The importance of that too, is you state several times in your supplementary brief as I recall, that you stake a lot on the potential for sales of the independent producer product you're involved in elsewhere in Canada and internationally.  So we'll have to clear that up.

 

1821    MR. HOLTBY:  I don't think --

 

1822    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I guess you weren't referring to the Lifestyles programs then?

 

1823    MR. HOLTBY:  No, no.  In fact, I don't think we've recognized any revenue from sales of any of our shows in our pro formas.           

 

1824    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You do say in the supplementary brief - we'll come to that in a moment - that there is potential for, and you will help in the dissemination of some of this product to Canada and abroad?

 

1825    MR. HOLTBY:  Oh, yes.  I think that's in the section where we talk about our creative development office.  I mean, that's one of our responsibilities would be to help the producer identify markets, identify investors, and help them in any way we can.

 

1826    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Which of the shows on your schedule will you co-produce?  I think we listed the Greek show and the other magazine shows.

 

1827    MR. MOY:  Greek, South Asian.

 

1828    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Right.

 

1829    MR. MOY:  Drama.

 

1830    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And these are co-productions with the independent producers;  local independent producers, or producers across Canada?

 

1831    MR. MOY:  We hope to be able to co-produce with local producers, but if the opportunity arises, then we'd like to work with a Canadian producer not located in British Columbia, and that may be, you know may be CFMT, or it could be in Montreal as well, too.  There's an ethnic station there as well.  So perhaps the opportunity may arise where we can work together.  And I think Doug mentioned that earlier about that, you know, that there are opportunities should we be awarded the licence, that we would find a way to work together.

 

1832    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.  Is there any other component --

 

1833    MR. HO:  I'm sorry, Commissioner, can I just also add to it?  It's not also limited to the producers in this country.  Sometimes there are other producers outside of this country who are interested in finding certain aspects of what's happening in this country, and they would want to produce a small series of films about what's happening in B.C.

 

1834    You know, we will be taking a look at it as well, because there's another perspective that nobody else is taking a look at it, but they'll be doing something that's about Canada, about maybe a certain ethnic community.  We will also be looking to work with them to help them to source the funds, et cetera.  And there's been a couple of occasions that we have done that through our radio station last year as well.  You know, it's been happening, so --

 

1835    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So you anticipate in your schedule and in your budget the potential for co-production and/or acquiring of independently produced product from either Canadian producers or international producers; is that correct?

 

1836    MR. HO:  Yes, but I would say the majority of that is coming from the local B.C. producers, to some extent national, and to a much lesser extent, maybe one out of two years that, like I say, it comes far in between, but we will pay attention to that as well.

 

1837    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Let me ask it another way.  Where on the schedule will we see the work of local, independent producers?

 

1838    MR. HO:  Again, we are getting a very flexible schedule within our own schedule here.  One of the things that if you take a look at the hours of our programs, say for instance, Table by the Exit, Sounds Right Tonight and Owners Away, well, we have calculated of all these programs together, because there are 13 episodes and 13 repeats, with all these programs being aired, with all the repeat being aired, we still have 22 hours.  That's just part of the flexibility that we build in to our program.

 

1839    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So the 16 percent, the 10 hours of independent production, where is that?  Is it all the Lifestyles programming?

 

1840    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner, as we've said in our deficiency, we said it could be shows like Yoga and You, Tai Chi.  We talked about movies.  We talked about Table by the Exit and Sounds Right Tonight.  We gave those as examples.  As we sit here today, we do not have an independent producer assigned to those particular shows.  They're actually ideas that came up through consultation with our various groups here.  But they could very well be. 

 

1841    What we've said is a minimum of 10 hours a week would utilize independent producers, and when I say independent producers, I mean producers that would be producing for national sale and other market sale, but also producing just for this local market, that it may end up at the end of the day that the Korean Lifestyles, that the only place that that show is broadcast is on this station.

 

1842    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  See, that's why I'm trying to get this clear, because earlier you said that Lifestyles would be produced by independent producers, but unlikely it would be useful elsewhere, saleable in other markets.

 

1843    MR. HOLTBY:  That's right.

 

1844    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So I understand that the independent production community were involved in the production of Lifestyles; that's part of the 10 hours.

 

1845    MR. HOLBY:  Yes.  I guess the problem we're having is, I mean, maybe I could say that everyone would be with an independent producers, but when you talk to them, some say, "I'd rather be a service producer," and there may be additional work for them on, you know, within the station and they'd like to be an employee.  So we've tried to give the Commission a sense for what our commitment is, that's it's a minimum of 10.  It very well could be all of the Lifestyle shows could be produced by people who are not in the employ of the station, because, as I said, people that are involved in the community that understand the community are best equipped to produce for that community, and we can't have 20 different producers on board that all they do is produce, you know, if we're paying them full time, producing one hour a day -- or one hour a week, pardon me.  It's just not possible and they wouldn't be busy.

 

1846    So, as I've said, some of these producers have other things that they're doing and they would love to come on board.  The problem I've had with all of this discussion is it doesn't follow the same -- the discussion isn't the same as conventional broadcasting, independent producers in conventional, you know what we're talking about.  But this isn't conventional.  It just doesn't work that way.

 

1847    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  No.  It works the way it should work for --

 

1848    MR. HOLTBY:  For ethnic.

 

1849    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- an ethnic programming station, and one which also has a very particular and challenging mandate to reflect the needs of several communities.

 

1850    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1851    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  One of the ways of doing this, you've said yourself, is through the independent production community.

 

1852    MR. HOLTBY:  Absolutely.

 

1853    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So it follows, I think, that we would want to examine how, where, and with what resources this is going to work.  It seems to be a variety, and we recognize the flexibility at this stage of the game you're looking at, but I'm just trying to get a sense of the types of programs, the relationship with the independent community, and what that means financially as well.

 

And there's different ways to slice that question, so we'll look at it from another angle.

 

1854    MR. HOLTBY:  I hope I've been clear, but I just want to mention one other thing.  When you cost out our schedule and allocate it to the various hours, you and your analyst will realize that there's some $900,000 that hasn't been allocated to any specific show.  And the reason for that is that we recognize that there are events that will be -- you have to have some extra money to cover special events that are not part of your regular schedule, and of course some of that would be available for independent producers as well, probably a good part of it.

 

1855    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  In fact, if you say some of it will be available, are you saying that -- and you said earlier that you would be involved possibly in the production of movies.  By movies, do you mean feature-length films?

 

1856    MR. HOLTBY:  I hope so.

 

1857    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Maybe movie of the week?

 

1858    MR. HOLTBY:  Baljit was telling me that she was doing some work for a company out of South Asia that want to do a movie.  Now, I mean, I don't think this station will be in a position in the first or second year, but why couldn't we enter into co-production with some of these other communities and produce a movie that a producer here in Vancouver has developed and -- and we find a market. 

 

1859    I mean, clearly we wouldn't be able to fund it ourselves totally, but if you can find a market, you can find some investors overseas, or a good pre-licence agreement and produce that, I think that's -- we've got a very vibrant production community here, and not just conventional.  The ethnic production community is very, very active.

 

1860    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So, forgive me if I repeat myself, it's just to be clear.  The interface with that community through the production of the Lifestyles program is clear, but you also are putting some money in the budget, the programming expenses budget, to potentially co-produce a feature-length film, or possible films down the road?

 

1861    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1862    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.

 

1863    MR. HO:  Can I also add to what Mr. Holtby just mentioned about you know, who owns what and being export?  What we have found in this situation, being an ethnic broadcaster in this part of the world for many years, what we have found is it's very difficult to export any of the program that's being produced locally.  It's a very small market that has not been explored.  However, with some success, we do export certain of our programs outside of this part of the world.  I mean, we are also exporting part of our radio programs back to Hong Kong, to L.A., San Francisco, but it's many years of cultivations, many years of exploration. 

 

1864    We've been through this situation.  We know how difficult it is.  So what we're saying is, we will try and will nurture this type of market, but we do not want to put it in our budget in there, you know, that we have not allocated any of the amount of money to be part of our revenue for the export market, simply because, like I say, it is a market still waiting to be explore.  But with our background, with our experience, I do believe that we can nurture this market and make it a go.  How successful it is, I still cannot tell, but there are people who are interested, you know, sourcing certain programs that are being aired locally.  Remember, we have a lot of program that's coming in from foreign sources into this part of the country, being the specialty side.  Remember, they are also looking from that source, also trying to find out what's happening in this country.  Instead of them sending a crew of people into this part of the world to do filming, there's a possibility that we may utilize our own local talents and do whatever they require and send it to them. 

 

1865    You know, there's a possibility of that but, like I say, we do not want that to be an overly optimistic situation, oversell it in our proposal at this moment, our supplementary brief.  It is all built in there.  You know, all these things we are aware of, we are looking out for, but we do not -- you know, they're so conservative.  It's something that we have to watch out every single step, we also wanted to make sure that this is going to be a market that we can pursue down the road as well.  As options, everything's there.

 

1866    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  If we take -- I recognize what you're saying and I think it's an important point we may want to come back to earlier in the balancing act that we look at when we talk about local production and the importance of that to communities, but if we look at it too, from the point of view of an independent producer and taking a view, a perspective on international issues or on local issues that are of great value to other communities as well, and we don't want to get ourselves caught, but I take your point, and mine as well, that we're trying to see what's in front of us as an application.

 

1867    If we look then at the independent production sector and your commitments, your plans, through the Lifestyles programming, through the potential for co-production of Lifestyles or other kinds of programming, through the potential for feature film, page 19 of your brief, you're going to encourage independent TV producers to develop these programs and spend 4.5 million over a seven-year licence term for ethnic programs in Western Canada.  Now, let's break this 4.5 million down into the story we've just told about where independent is going and what it's doing.  First of all, the 4.5 million, is that per year or over the seven years?  Just taking a page out of the book. here.  Just trying. 

 

1868    MR. HOLTBY:  That's a commitment over the seven years.

 

1869    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.  I'm-

 

1870    MR. HOLTBY:  I mean, this is where perhaps we have not been as clear as we should have been.  That is clearly identified, independent producers in the conventional definition, that they own the rights.  It's a program that is exported.  If we use the blotter definition of independent producers, the producers that will doing the Lifestyle shows that are local shows, it's more like $4,000,000 a year.  It's between $3,000,000 and $4,000,000 a year we'd be spending on independent producers.  So we've identified what those programs would likely be.

 

1871    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  All right. 

 

1872    MR. HOLTBY:  Does that make -- is that clear?

 

1873    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I'm going to finally look at 4.2 and go through that program expense list.  I think that would be helpful.  But let me just repeat.  You're saying that the 4.5 million has nothing to do with the Lifestyles independent producers; that is in another part of the budget; that is programming expense in the global expense; the 4.5 million is over and above that for independent production that is in the nature of co-production, the nature of the feature film development, the nature of other kinds of programs.  Am I correct?  Is that what you're saying?

 

1874    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  As I said earlier, there's some $900,000 of program costs included in our financials that are not identified of any particular show, and what that is, is that's monies that's available to do specials and independent production that we just talked about would be part of that as well.  And we have also included in our costing the cost of doing these Tai Chi, and Yoga and You, which could be independent production, and we've fully cost those out.

 

1875    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So the 4.5 million dollars commitment, independent production, refers to what exactly?

 

1876    MR. HOLTBY:  It refers to independent productions that the independent producer owns the copyright for. 

 

1877    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  What productions are those on your schedule?

 

1878    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, we have not signed with any producer, but what we identified was, it would be shows like Yoga and You, and Tai Chi, and By the Door, and Sounds Right.  I mean, those are examples of shows that potentially I think a producer would find of interest, that have potential of outside sales. 

 

1879    A Spanish Lifestyle is not going to have any outside sales potential, I wouldn't think.  Perhaps maybe on a specialty service or something, but unlikely.  It's local.  It's not likely to be relevant.              COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  All right.  The 4.5 million then, as your commitment to the independent sector, one of the criteria I'm hearing you say is that it's the kind of program which has potential for other markets; is that correct?

 

1880    MR. HOLTBY:  That is correct.

 

1881    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Is the 4.5 million designed to cover all the cost of a typical production, or is it seed money?

 

1882    MR. HOLTBY:  No.  We have a separate budget for script and concept development, but it would be a sizeable portion, but each project the arrangements are different.

 

1883    It may mean with the independent producer that it's a pre-licence arrangement.  It may mean that it's a pre-licence arrangement and debt financing, or a loan or equity financing.  I mean, there's lots of different ways for the producer to do it.

 

1884    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Would this be limited to third language programming?

 

1885    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  That's what we're talking about, is third language, yes.

 

1886    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Limited to any particular group?

 

1887    MR. HOLTBY:  No.

 

1888    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  How will the selection be made of these projects, or have you established guidelines, or how will you establish those guidelines if you haven't, and how will they be made public?

 

1889    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, should we receive approval for this licence, the first step is to get into the consultation process with the respective communities. 

 

1890    We've given you what we think is a realistic -- and it's a demonstration of the kind of programming that we will be doing.  When we talk about lifestyle shows like Spanish or Italian, we have a number of proposals already.  We would solicit more from the entire independent production community.  Then they would be assessed with the help of the advisory council and community leaders in those communities and our own people, and then you would select a producer to get the show up and running for broadcast. 

 

1891    So it's a long process, but we think it's important that we don't sit in an ivory tower, you know, in the building, and we decide what is relevant for these various ethnic communities.  I think that's the wrong approach.   It's not like conventional broadcasting where you've got somebody who walks in the door, and they meet with one person, and he says, "Gee, I think the majority of my audience will love that show," and they give a green light.  There's going to be a consultation process if we're going to create shows that are reflective and relevant to our various communities.

 

1892    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Could I ask you to turn to 4.2 of the supplementary brief.  I believe there was a revised version sent with the July 30^th letter, and that's the one I'm looking at.

 

1893    MR. HOLTBY:  Where, Commissioner?

 

1894    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Section 4.2, which is the list of programming expenses.  I may have misled you.  They may not be replacement pages.  Let's just take the 4.2 of the brief.

 

1895    MR. HOLTBY:  Right.

 

1896    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  All right?

 

1897    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1898    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  If we look at that 4.5 million dollar commitment to the independent production sector, where would I find it in the programming expenses on that grid?

 

1899    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, it's 4.5 for over seven years.

 

1900    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Understood.

 

1901    MR. HOLTBY:  So, roughly, 650,000 a year, and a good part of that would be in information, categories 2(a), 3, 4, and 5.  Some of it would be in long form documentary.  The 900,000 that I was telling you about, we do not have anything in our schedule that is long form documentary, category 2(b), and we have nothing in our schedule for regionally produced priority programming, 251. 

 

1902    There's no shows attached to that 900,000, so that's where the 900 is.  But the independent production would be in categories 2(b), 2(a), you know, that section.  If we just look at the left-hand side, 2, 3, drama and comedy, obviously, independent producers would be involved, and could be involved in that, and music as well.  Those shows are identified.

 

1903    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Those shows are identified -- the 4.5 million which I'm trying to paint here as a separate program just to get it clear, as a commitment to the independent production sector, and if our discussion has been clear, it's really programming that is over and above the schedule as we see it.  It's potential programming in areas that are yet to be developed.

 

1904    You're saying to us that that 4.5 million is in this budget, in these program expenses, it's buried in there amongst the other programming expenses for these kind of programs that will appear on the schedule; is that correct?

 

1905    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes, that's correct.  It depends what shows come forward from independent producers that are funded, that's right.

 

1906    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The Lifestyles programming which will be produced by the independent sector as well, although it's --

 

1907    MR. HOLTBY:  Right.

 

1908    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- not included in the 4.5 million --

 

1909    MR. HOLTBY:  That's true.

 

1910    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: -- where is the money for that?

 

1911    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, that's the third line, the $2,175,000 is mainly Lifestyles.

 

1912    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That's in there?

 

1913    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1914    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  You mentioned the development office?

 

1915    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.

 

1916    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Where's the budget for the development office?

 

1917    MR. HOLTBY:  It's under Script and Concept Development, Canadian Programs not Telecast, $105,000 the first year.

 

1918    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Is that administrative expensive, or expenses to support the program to --

 

1919    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, if you're going to do the job right, you have to have at least part of a person, maybe half or a whole person, but it would be  -- then the rest would be development money.

 

1920    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So that  $105,000 will not be entirely going to this script development; some of it will be administrative?

 

1921    MR. HOLTBY:  Actually I should ask Phillip.

 

1922    MR. MOY:  Commissioner, I would say that most it, or approximately, say 100 percent of it, is going towards the script and concept development versus administration.

 

1923    MR. HOLTBY:  We have a person involved in this budgeted, so they must be in administration then.

 

1924    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  On that development program, since we're there, how will projects be assessed, and is this a separate project from the training program?

 

1925    MR. HOLTBY:  How will projects be assessed?

 

1926    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  How will projects be assessed?  Do you have criteria in place?

 

1927    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, that's what we've been talking about this morning.  You know, clearly, it would be programs that are local in character, they're relevant and sensitive and reflective of our respective communities.  We have a commitment with the Commission here that we would do 22 hours.  So, clearly, there would be a criteria about -- 22 languages, pardon me.  So there would be a criteria about language that we'd have to deal with.  There would be a criteria about quality, reflection for the community.  There would an assessment made, as I said, by our independent advisory council, and the communities themselves.

 

1928    But the decisions at the end of the day, commissioner, would be made here in Vancouver for every hour of the schedule.

 

1929    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The development office I'm talking about says not to be telecast.  Are you assuming that some of the projects supported through the development office will end up on the schedule?

 

1930    MR. HOLTBY:  I would think so.  I don't know why you would have a development office if you didn't want to -- I mean, the whole idea is to develop.  But we're saying it's not immediate, that they're trying to develop things for the future, but there's no sense in having a development office if you're not going to bring it to reality.  I mean, the whole idea is to develop it, and make the show happen.

 

1931    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  The development office is also related to your comments in your brief in several places on the maturing and growing of the production community, and your concern to assist that development. You also propose a training program, which I assume to be separate?

 

1932    MR. HOLTBY:  It's separate.

 

1933    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Can you describe that program to us, and also, again, indicate what its budget is and where that budget appears in the programming expenses.

 

1934    MR. HO:  I can talk to you about the training side of things, and I would pass on the details of the training budgets over to Phillip.

 

1935    As far as the training is concerned, what we have found is that by consulting with the community, we have found a lot of these people in the community are very concerned about quality programs that we're going to air.  And then the other problem that we have been experiencing throughout these last few years are the Multicultural Channel.  First, it was owned for a long time by Rogers, and just recently turned over to Shaw Multicultural.  Again, the impression that people have about these programs that's going to be aired over the TV stations are very low quality, low budget, low quality because, simply said, they do not have the budget to do it.

 

1936    So one of the main criteria that we're going to do is working with the independent producer who is going to be doing a lot of our programs.  There has to be a certain standard.  There has to be a certain quality.  We try to train them, or work with them along the way, and to meet a certain standard.

 

1937    And then the second part of the situation, that we do have a lot of people in our local community at this moment who are also very interested in getting their product to the market, getting some of their products to be aired.  And there has to be a certain quality standard as well, and we will also be helping them along the way.

 

1938    And thirdly, just also to give you one example, one of the sources actually came from our chairperson, Mr. Bob Lee, who is involved very heavily in the UBC, and UBC has this wonderful place called School of Journalism.  I've talked to their people over there, and it's quite amazing how much work they've been doing.  It's a two-year master program, and we actually have discussions only - it's not something that we're signing a piece of paper - a discussion that we would like to use some of their talents, or some of their people, and they will do maybe once a month a half an hour documentation that's related to either current affair news or that has to do with whatever that's involved in the school of journalism. 

 

1939    The students there, they will actually produce this program with our assistance, with our training, and they'll be also utilizing our facility, utilizing our personnel and part of their equipment at the School of Journalism, and we're going to air this. But they'll be the one who is supervising, and we'll also be the people who will be assisting them.  And this is not just a one-time situation.  It will be going on for a duration of a period. 

 

1940    Like I say, if it becomes a successful situation, it may become a regular program that we'd be airing, and the frequency may be increased, or the situation that we will be working with another university, or put all the universities together and maybe make a project of a year. 

 

1941    All of these we've been talking about, and I will turn this over to Phillip right now to talk about the budget allocations.  Thank you.

 

1942    MR. MOY:  Commissioner, the training costs are, more or less, broken down into three components.  One is, of course, that those costs are embedded within the cost that you see on question 4.2, where you have the breakdown of the various costs for, say, news, long form, information, drama, et cetera,  so when you hire someone, an employee, and of course, when you train them, you might be paying them a full-time or part-time salary or wage.  Of course, they might be being trained so those costs are built into the various program costs itself. 

 

1943    Part two is that we have set aside in our budget approximately $150,000 per year in direct training and professional development of these various producers.  I guess the third part is basically what James has been mentioning, is that indirectly, the shareholders and of course the advisory council members have been contributing personally, and through their other businesses, to the various local universities and colleges in Vancouver, and so therefore indirectly training some of these potential employees of a company like Multivan.  So those are the three components I can identify.

 

1944    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you.  That's very helpful.  So, if we take the second component, is that really the component we are referring to when we're talking about developing the talent and abilities of the producer community?  That's on page 16 of the supplementary brief, that, you said was $150,000?

 

1945    MR. MOY:  That's correct.          

 

1946    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  How will that $150,000 be used?  Is it equipment?  Is it salaries of those who will be training?  Is it production money?

 

1947    MR. MOY:  Okay.  It would be a variety of items.  The equipment, most of the equipment is going to be in-house.  That's part of that $13 million capital costs budget that we have mentioned earlier.  As James mentioned earlier as well, it's possible that we may purchase additional cameras, to have these students - I'm calling them students - to go out there into the community and to film what they believe is relevant to their own communities, and so those costs would be included.  And if they are hired as, say, summer students, and the last time I checked summer students still need to get paid, so therefore, those wages would be included.  So I would say they are direct costs of the training, so would include any of the administration costs.

 

1948    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  It's important, again, with distinctions because we were talking about the production community and the availability of a large pool of talent ready to go.  I mean, qualified, quality producers, who are ready, willing and able to provide you what you need in your Lifestyles programming and ready, willing and able, sitting on projects they've been dying to produce for years, and some of that with potential. 

 

1949    Then there's training of those who are getting started and I hear you covering all those bases.  What I had understood from your brief was training of the producers to pull them from a level of one level to another, and I gather you're taking a broader stroke than that.  Have I understood it correctly?

 

1950    MR. MOY:  That's correct.  It would be a combination.  It could be for the producer who has limited knowledge, still very creative, very talented, but they have a vision to take on being a producer as their career.  So they need development, they need motivation, of course, and we would be nurturing these producers, as well as students who are still in university or college.  They may not have decided as to whether this should be their career or not, so we want to help them along and develop them as well.

 

1951    In addition to that, there's one item that I should also add and that is the scholarship.

 

1952    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I was about to ask.  It's over and above the scholarship.

 

1953    MR. MOY:  That's over and above as well.  So the scholarship is amounting to $30,000 per year and so we think that that would benefit the community.

 

1954    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Okay.

 

1955    MR. HO:  Let me just make another clarification here.  When we talk about equipments, vehicles and camera, everything, it's actually included in our depreciation of the expenses. It's not operating expenses, it's not going to be part of the money that we're going to be included in the money that we're going to be, how shall I put it, you know, the equipment hard cost is in a separate category.

 

1956    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Right.

 

1957    MR. HO:  So don't treat that as part of this.  Further to that, I just want to make absolutely clear, all right --

 

1958    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes, Mr. Ho.

 

1959    MR. HO:  The $220,000 -- the $200,000 scholarship that we're talking about --

 

1960    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Two hundred and ten.

 

1961    MR. HO:  -- those are new monies from the station.  Those are not monies coming from any of the directors from their own pocket.  They have their own separate scholarship that they're going to donate which could be a much larger amount than this one, so it's an entirely separate situation that we're talking about, okay.  We're not double-counting here.

 

1962    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  All right.  I understand.  I'll leave that to my colleague.

 

1963    MR. SEGAL:  James, if you don't mind, I'll speak for myself.  I've been involved for many, many years in this community.  You can tell that from the white hair.  And I've been involved in the university and, for example -- and I don't believe in bribery.  This is my obligation to the community that I have made my money in, the community that I live in, and the community that I intend to stay in.  So, for example, my wife has established at Simon Fraser University a fund for special needs students.  It doesn't do a lot, but it provides 20 or 30 or $40,000 a year on an ongoing basis.  And I have to tell you that that little fund for special needs students makes the difference between being able to graduate, being able to do it as a single parent where you have a handicap, and it's an invaluable kind of a thing.  But, James, this is something that your shareholders have been doing for years in this community.  I contribute to Simon Fraser University.  I chaired the Centre for Dialogue because I believed in the campaign for the Centre for Dialogue, and I still chair the operating entity of it.  The reason I do that is because I believe in it.  It also attracts, with the privilege of doing this, a substantial personal donation to the university.  I have contributed to Simon Fraser University probably in my association with it close to $2 million dollars.  Whether we get a license or we don't, doesn't influence that approach.  I think this is very, very important.  But it's also indicative of  having your finger on the pulse of the community. There are so many different needs in this community, and the needs are so diverse because of the diverse nature of the ethnic groups within the community. 

 

1964    So I believe that this item that says scholarships, or whatever you call it, or contribution to the community grants and whatever, I think it's peanuts in terms of what has been taking place.

 

1965    MR. HO:  I just want to make sure that the operation of the business is a viable one, but.

 

1966    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And I believe you have an uppity advisory council.

 

1967    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I was about to say.  I will thank you for your comments, Mr. Segal.  I'm sure Commissioner Cardozo will pursue the discussion on advisory board, scholarships and community connections.  I want to close the loop on independent production with you and them move on to demand.  You won't be surprised at my next comment.

 

1968    Having gone through the elements of your independent production plans as best we could, what I certainly have retained is a commitment of 4.5 minimum over the license term.  And if we understand ourselves, this is for productions with the independent production community where they will retain the rights on programming which has potential and you will support its potential, not only in this community but across the country, that that represents a minimum of 10 hours, 16 percent, or is a component of that 10 hours or 16 percent?  Maybe you better clear that up.  You jumped when I said that, so I guess I didn't get that right. If you say you're doing 16 percent independent production of your schedule or 10 hours and we've been discussing the 4.5 million, it's easy for me to connect the two, but if that's not the case, perhaps you better clear it up.

 

1969    MR. HOLTBY:  I apologize, commissioner.  I'm, frankly, getting confused myself when we talk about is it independent or independent?    I think it is 10 hours that we're talking about, and that's over and above all of the Lifestyles -- but those are independent as well.  I just want to check that.

 

1970    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  We're on the same wavelength them.  All right.  And then the development office and the training program as discussed.  Can you comment on the possibility of these commitments regarding the independent sector becoming a condition of license?

 

1971    MR. HOLTBY:  We would accept them as condition of license.

 

1972    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you. And not finished yet quite, but close.  I'd like to conclude, as did the Chair yesterday, on the whole issue of demand and the studies you've produced with your proposal and just ask some questions that help us understand better how you use these studies to prepare your program scheduling and your content.  By way of introduction, and I'd be referring mostly to the Ipsos Reid study, Mr. Schattenburg; is that correct?

 

1973    MR. SCHATTENBURG:  Yes.

 

1974    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And, Mr. Meiklejohn, just a little bit on your study, and the others I think will relate more to the revenue and advertising expenses.  The highlights of the study, the Ipsos Reid study are clear:  there was a strong interest in the proposed concept; you propose it will meet the needs of the viewers, and, in fact, the study highlights the fact that the most attractive element among ethnic viewers is the programming offered in a multitude of languages.  And the study says in several places that this is what people are expecting and the advisory board is expecting.  The study also notes, in several places, that the overwhelming majority of the viewers watch television in the evening, the ethnic viewers, hence, the proposed station must pay extremely close attention to the evening schedule; that's pages 18 to 20.  And on page 21, the station can be confident that it will extract the most viewers during prime time and the late night slot. 

 

1975    Now, I just described the English block programming and I gave you a heads-up on this question earlier.  Can you comment they why most of the English, non-ethnic programming is scheduled during this period where most of the viewers are.  One would get the impression from the description read for this unique service to your interviewees that what they were expecting in the evening was unique, and that what they were expecting, particularly the younger viewers, was what they were not seeing now on television, and yet, the evening hours are English blocked programming.

 

1976    Now, I recognize there is a financial issue here, but can you, from the researcher point of view, discuss why, in spite of that, the schedule has turned out the way it is, and from a programming point of view, what your comment is on that.  Mr. Ho, you may want to start.  I talked to Mr. Ipsos Reid back there, but I'm not sure if you want to --

 

1977    MR. SCHATTENBERG:  Yes, indeed.  If I could just preface this, the purpose of our survey, one of the objectives was to understand the viewing habits of the ethnic population, in particular, how they may have differed from the mainstream population, and our findings reveal that the patterns of television viewing are quite similar in the ethnic populations compared to the mainstream population.  And again, we were looking at a population between the ages of 18 to 64.  As in most surveys of media habits, what we find is that people are engaged at work and school from 9:00 to 5:00, and it's not surprising that the primary television hours are in the evening.  That's why it's called prime time.  We did uncover that there are other hours of the day when television viewing takes place.  This, of course, is going to vary by age and by participation in work and school.  I think we fulfilled one of our objectives in placing this question on the survey, and determining that there were not dramatic differences between the ethnic population and the mainstream population in terms of their viewing habits, other than a small blip in terms of what the South Asian population reported. 

 

1978    So just to preface that, I defer to my colleagues in terms of how this is going to influence and impact the concrete programming decisions that will be made.

 

1979    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  What is your comment on that, gentlemen, in terms of how -- I recognize the model that we talked about from a business point of view, but when you look at that reality and then you look at providing a unique service, and the description read out to the interviewees, how do you respond in terms of the final schedule you proposed?

 

1980    MR. HO:  Well, the final schedule is, you know, in consultation and looking at this whole thing.  We also realize the ethnic community wanted to have a prime time hour of their programming.  This is why, when we did our scheduling, we scheduled between 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. these prime time hours to have ethnic programming during those time.  That's one of the major commitments that we've done, Monday through Sunday, seven days a week.

 

1981    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  One other question that was interesting too, your study noted that South Asians have a much greater interest that other ethnic populations between watching television between 12:00 and noon.  I think that was clearly laid out, and 17 percent of the respondents, South Asian respondents indicated that during a typical week they watched television between noon and 3:00; 27 indicated they watch between 3:00 and 6:00.  Yet, the proposed schedule indicates 30 minutes per day from 4:00 to 4:30 for the South Asian community between Monday and Friday, leaving aside, I guess, the news.  Do you feel that you're missing an opportunity here to provide South Asian audiences with ethnic language programming during a portion of the day when most are watching, where now there's a big block of English programming?

 

1982    MR. HO:  Commissioner Pennefather, this is the situation where compromises come in.  You know, recognizing what we have at this moment of other stations in town that's airing these multicultural programs.  It's a balance that we're trying to do.  And, again, I wanted to mention what we're trying to do is complementary instead of taking over their airtime.  They have been there already and they have been airing their programs even though it's kind of unpredictable where they are, but we realize that's one of the airtime that's prime time to them as well.  And if we're going to go in and take that hour away, we're going to just totally destroy these other producers as well, and this is not something that we wanted to do.  We already have a prime time hour in the evening, and I think those are the key prime times that we want, we have to target.  And we will leave room for other TV stations so that they can have their own producers airing during those hours as well, so that's a complementary type of thing that they can survive and we can survive; balancing.

 

1983    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you. It's important to hear how the programmer reacts to the demand studies because I recognize there are some interesting facts that emerged, and the schedule doesn't necessarily end up being what perhaps people were expecting, but the realities are that you're looking for some kind of balance there.

 

1984    I'm looking at the studies that make comments on programming, obviously, and expectations, and there's some wording in the Meiklejohn report.  What does the term progressive first-run, ethnic programming mean?  First-run I can perhaps understand, but was there something else that that term meant, and why progressive?

 

1985    MR. MEIKLEJOHN:  The word "progressive first-run" is a reflection of the participants in the focus groups distinguishing between what they perceived to be perhaps programming of secondary quality.  So perhaps another way to describe the word "progressive" would be cutting-edge or new programming.

 

1986    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Cutting- edge or new?

 

1987    MR. MEIKLEJOHN:  Those are my words, yes.

 

1988    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And it's your reading that that's what the focus groups were expecting, cutting-edge new programming, that's what one is looking for, over and above what is available, in ethnic programming?

 

1989    MR. MEIKLEJOHN:  With the participants, they seemed to indicate a frustration that programming they've been open to, to date, they perceived it to perhaps be stale or to be non-topical or not relevant to their interests.  Of note, in your previous question about mainstream programming, they also saw this as a valuable way to learn about western culture, in a safe way, in their homes.

 

1990    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  This is what you meant by the term "intercultural catalyst" in another summary point?

 

1991    MR. MEIKLEJOHN:  I believe so, yes.

 

1992    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I've come to my last question, believe it or not, maybe last and a half.  As the Chair said yesterday, this is a very, very fascinating and challenging area and we really appreciate the time that you take to answer and put some meat on the bones, what is scheduling and the magic of television and the difficulty of programming and all of that.  I've given perhaps short shrift to the work done on the research side, but we read the highlights, we know what some of the components are.  If we look at those demand studies, and particularly the last comment about the cutting-edge shows, looking for something different, can you tell us how you wrap up how you see your proposal really meeting this demand for new cutting-edge approach?  Think, too, about what the Chair was saying earlier about a pattern that has news to the Chinese/South Asian community, and yet the Vietnamese has the Lifestyles program, and in that program everything is contained, I would assume: the news, the entertainment, the local stories, how do you see your approach responding to the demand that, both qualitative and quantitative, that has come out of the demand studies?  How does this schedule and how does your philosophy really meet that?

 

1993    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I think I'll perhaps start and I'm sure others will have some comments.  I would start my summary by saying that this is, indeed, a challenge.  What we're trying to create here is a service that is relevant to a multitude of languages and communities, so it's not without it's challenges, as the Commission is well aware.

 

1994    I think if we break it down between the different ethnic communities, we've tried to be sensitive to the Chinese and South Asian communities, that there's already material available, and we've tried to be, as James as said, complementary and not be overly aggressive has been a factor.  Our Chinese and South Asian programming is not in direct proportion to the size of those communities, but we think it's going to be very relevant.  We're going to give them two new hours of news each day, and it will be very relevant and that news will be predominantly local and reflective of their community back to them and their country and their province and internationally. 

 

1995    When we look at the other communities, you're quite correct that there's a limited amount of time, but we will do our best with the advice of our advisory council and the communities themselves and the independent producers that we will be working with to create programs that will be responsive to their communities.  And I don't think that the Lifestyle shows, they'll be some similarities between each one but they will be different for each community, I would suspect, because these ethnic communities have different needs and different desires.  The German Lifestyles, it could be very substantially different than the Spanish for example.  I don't know many German dancers for example, just by way of a .

 

1996    So I think we've tried to build in a local reflection, a local flavour and texture to our schedule.  In addition, we have proposed some acquisition of other Canadian programs we would want to work with, should we get your blessing, with CFMT and CJNT in Montreal and find ways of doing things together.  But at the end of the day, the decisions on all of the program schedule, the entire schedule, what we acquire, what we produce, will be made here, locally and they're made here in consultation with our communities and with our advisory council. That's some of the main summary of the schedule. 

 

1997    It is a challenge, it is a very big challenge, but I think in the fullness of time that the ethnic programming, if it's done right and done well, it's going to attract a good audience and the future is very good, indeed.

 

1998    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you, Mr. Holtby.  That may be my final question but it's not your final answer of the day, I'm sure, so I will turn you over to the Chair and my colleagues.  Thank you for your patience with my questions.

 

1999    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Commissioner Pennefather.  Commissioner Cardozo, please.

 

2000    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I will go over sections dealing with localness or local presence - I think localness is probably a better word in your case - community feedback and social issues.  And just to let you know, we'd like to break around 12:30, so somewhere around there at a convenient point in this discussion we'll take a break, and if need be, I'll carry on the questioning after and certainly other colleagues will have questions too.

 

2001    We'll be covering the same subjects I  covered yesterday, but I assure you, they'll be different questions, so I hope you didn't rehearse the answers based on the questions I posed yesterday.  And certainly when we're dealing with the issue of localness, it's, in a sense, a mirror image of the discussion we had yesterday.  And the question I have is, does ownership have to be local?  Is good local management not good enough?

 

2002    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  You didn't ask that question yesterday.  I think that local ownership is always better.  I'm not saying that conventional television stations that are owned outside of a local community can't do a good job.  I'm not suggesting that for a moment.  But I think that if you look at the history of broadcasting in this country, a locally owned television station has a better feel of what that market is all about.  That's what I sharpened my teeth on; broadcasting with a local television station in Edmonton.  And I can assure the Commission that the productions that we got involved and that we build the biggest studio in Western Canada, would not have been built in Edmonton if it was just a subsidiary of another bigger company because Edmonton is not the logical place to be doing major productions, but we lived there and we wanted to do them.  We did movies and SCTV, and a musical series, and created quite a dynamic industry there in that market.  Plus, we reflected the community to itself through our news. 

 

2003    I think, though, where conventional broadcasters can adequately be owned, I guess, outside by larger groups, and we've seen some changes here in Vancouver, and I think the question of whether or not BCTV and CHEK will retain their position in the minds and hearts of Vancouverites and Victoriates, in that only time will tell whether or not the new owners can do as good a job as the prior owners.  But I think ethnic broadcasting is completely different.  We used to go down to Los Angeles and buy programs and we would be making decisions for all of Canada and you can do that, I think, to some extent.  I think perhaps you're better off -- I mean, obviously if we could segment it, it would even be better, but you can do that with conventional broadcasting.  I think ethnic broadcasting is totally different, and as I have got involved in this the last seven months I understand the differences of ethnic communities from Vancouver to Montreal to Toronto are very different; their histories are different.  And I don't think you can understand that by making the decisions in a city three time zones away.  I just don't think it's possible. 

 

2004    So I think that the added benefit - and I'm going to give you a little pitch here - but the added benefit of this group is that they've been there, they are ethnic, they emigrated or were born here, with the exception of me.  And I'm just a wannabe, I guess.

 

2005    MR. HO:  He's a minority.

 

2006    MR. HOLTBY:  We've got a fabulous advisory council, and you'll get to see some of them during the intervention process.  And I think when you combine all of those elements, that local ownership and ownership that understands the community and lives here and contributes to it is a far better choice than an owner, no matter how good his intentions are, living three time zones away.  It's more difficult.  We live here.  We will get feedback every day.  Our friends are here and our neighbours are here, and we'll get feedback every day.  Monica?

 

2007    MS. DEOL:   If I can speak again about what it was like to grow up in Canada and be a visible minority, whether it was in Winnipeg, or it was in Toronto, or it was here, I made a point of tuning in to Indian shows.  It mattered to me.  Whether I worked on MuchMusic or didn't, I still watched Indian programs because I wanted to connect with my people.  I wanted to know where they were in this city, what was going on with them in this city. 

 

2008    I think that if you're talking about generic television -- I love Toronto.  I have no problem with Toronto.  Toronto was very, very good to me.  I have no problem with somebody owning stations across the country.  That's fine if you're talking about generic television, if you're talking about Friends, you're talking about Frasier, but I think that when it comes to multiethnic, I think that's personal.  I think people take that personally.  I think people take it on a very different emotional level than -- you know, you can watch Friends in Houston, or you can watch it in Halifax, or you can watch it here, and you relate to it in more or less the same way.  But multiethnic television is the heart and soul of a city.  You need to see yourselves in a way that you can connect with, and that all of you can connect with.  So I think that, no, you can't just drop a model in that works somewhere else and say that it will work here.  Somebody who is Greek may not have -- you know, they may be in Toronto and they may come here and they will have a completely different experience of what it means to be Greek in this city.

 

2009    As I said as somebody who's Sikh, we talk about it all the time that, you know, people in Toronto are different.  Their values are a little bit different.  People here, it's a little bit different.  They've been here for a long time, the Indians here, a long time.  There's a different texture.  And I think that to understand it, you have to live here, you have to live the life.  And then I look at the owners, and whether it's Joe, you know, who looks like everybody else, but who has a very strong sense of his culture, very strong sense of his heritage, you know, you can't buy that experience.  You either live it or you don't.  You either get it or you don't.  I think that these owners have a different respect for what it means to walk into a room and be visibly different, or culturally different, or to be stereotyped.  They've lived it.  They know what it means to be all sussed up by just how you look, so they have a natural respect, a natural sensitivity to that, that, again, you cannot buy.  I'm done.

 

2010    MR. SEGAL:  Commissioner Cardozo, I'd like to answer your question in a different way because I think it's a very good, relevant question.  I have been - I guess I've been in marketing all my life - but I've been associated with companies that are based in Montreal and companies that are based in Toronto, head offices, and we in the West Coast, our regional apparition.  And I'll give you an example.  In the retail business, when it rains in Vancouver, it's the spring.  When it rains in Montreal, it's the fall.  And I could never get a buyer to understand that there are regional differences between Montreal and Vancouver.  And so we would get raincoats in the fall and Montreal would get raincoats in the fall.  So this is a question of being in the region, having your finger on the pulse and understanding your marketplace, and I believe that with all of the components that we bring to the party, most important is an understanding of this marketplace.  Thank you.

 

2011    MS. SANGRA:  If I could just add something here just with regards to the importance of local ownership.  I think as an independent producer you really need that accessibility and I talked a bit about that in the video.  I mean, I believe you need representation that's successful and that's been my experience with Multivan.  A Vancouver-based producer has a better chance of getting things produced by a local station than going back east, especially if you're a new emerging filmmaker or emerging talent.  It's really important to have local representation.

 

2012    MR. HO:  Commissioner Cardozo, I just wanted to finish this by saying -- well, maybe there will still be other comments.  Local ownership, it's just not any type of local ownership.  I mean, the group that we have composed here together I believe is a very high quality of local ownership who are credible throughout the history been living in Vancouver, who has an incredible amount of track record that's responsible to this community, and who's relevant and most of all, who is also accountable. 

 

2013    We are putting in front of you a license -- or application.  We started immediately with a minimum amount of 60 percent Canadian content.  This is simply just the way we are.  We believe that we can do it and we'll try our best to do it.  And amongst all the owners who've already talked about this whole thing many times about the financial side of things, being responsible and accountable, and we have to face the community day in and day out.  I mean, take a look at some of the -- I'm still young, but they've been through a lot.  Again, Mr. Segal, I cannot speak for him, but he has been through seven downturns, seven economic downturns.  Bob has been through five economic downturns.  We're still around.  Why?  Because they're good business people and they're accountable.

 

2014    MR. LEE:  You've got more hair on the heads than I do.

 

2015    MR. HO:  Having said all of that, it's also with respect to this community that we know what's happening.  Thank you.

 

2016    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Let me put to you a different scenario.  Take the four of you at the front table, or all of you, and supposing another broadcaster from Toronto or Montreal, from somewhere east was to own the application, the station that you'd be applying for, and employed all of you to be the people on the ground here.  Now, some of you are too rich to ever be owned by somebody else, I accept that, but, if you take that out -- take the competence of the team that you're putting forward, couldn't you do just as good a job as if you were owning it?

 

2017    MS. DEOL:  Can I just -- first of all, I am not a hired gun.  The only people who hire me --

 

2018    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  No, but you could be a volunteer just as well.

 

2019    MS. DEOL:  I'm just saying that I'm not a hired gun.  The only people who, you know, own me are my kids.  So when they phoned me and asked me to be a part of this, like, I'm not looking for more work. I've got a child who's five, four and two.  I have enough to do.  And I said to them, you know, "I don't have time to do this," and then I said, "Okay, in all fairness, let me have a look at what you're proposing."  And the first thing I said to James and Joe was, "You guys don't need me.  You're in the loop. You don't need an advisory council to tell you about multi-ethnic in this city because you're insiders.  You're not outsiders.  You're living it.  What do you need a council for?"  So that was my attitude first. 

 

2020    I joined this, took this on, because I really believe that there is a difference, and it is not generic television, and that these people understand what multi-ethnic television means in a different way.  Again, I say you can't buy that and you can't ask people, you know, there's the approach that you come in and you hire people, but these people have lived it.  They understand it in a different way.  I can't emphasis enough to you how important that is.  There is a different sensitivity.  There is a different understanding of what the make-up is here.  They don't need to come in and hire people to tell them that.  It's an important distinction.

 

2021    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  No, I understand that, but my point is you could have a broadcaster from the east hire and recruit volunteers who have all that sensitivity, all that understanding, all that background, all that experience, just as you do.  And that team, could do just as well, could they not?

 

2022    MR. HO:  Well, in theory, in theory,  Commissioner Cardozo, maybe what you're saying here, in theory, it could be correct, however, we're not dealing -- we're here, we're dealing with human beings.  Everybody has different characters, sensitivity, et cetera.  I must say yes to your answer partially and no to the majority part of it is because of lack of sincerity. 

 

2023    The reason why I say that, and since this is already in the open, I have to say that - all the directors, all the partners knows about this - that, yes, I have personally met with CFMT beforehand.  What they had proposed to us, or to me, beforehand, was why don't you just take the Chinese hour and just produce the Chinese hour for us and forget about everything else.  We'll pay you a reasonable amount of money for you to do it.  I say, no, because we're really interested in the license here, you know, we would like to work.  The next time when we meet, of course, is again the emphasis of this proposal and plus an investment of them into my radio station.  Again, that's not a viable situation for us to go.

 

2024    I understand what you're talking about.  I mean, in this application there's only two applicants, but we have to look at the sincerity.  It's not a breakdown of business view, but sincerity-wise, whether we can work with them or whether we cannot work with them.  We have tried.

 

2025    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  All of these issues of ownership end up being somewhat subjective, and I don't want to say I disagree with what you said. The Act doesn't tell us to favour local ownership over non-local ownership.  There are certain indications that there should be good reflection, involvement, et cetera, of local understanding, programming and that kind of stuff.  So what I'm trying to do in this part of the discussion is get from you as much as possible, guidance, about how you think we should be dealing with the issue of local ownership. 

 

2026    I have one more question in terms of what people have said.  Ms. Deol, you said you don't only want a model from somewhere else, but, with respect, the model that you put forward is a whole lot like the CFMT model from Toronto.  It's eight percent different.  It's, some might say it's a tried and true model, some might say it's imported from Toronto, or some might say it's minimalist as some of the interventions will suggest with the 40 percent, or in your case 31, 32 percent English, you will be losing a certain amount of ethnic programming.  So the model you're dealing with is, to a large extent, the Toronto model; is it not?

 

2027    MR. HOLTBY:  To a large extent, Commissioner.  Actually, I like to call it the Commission's model, the 60/40 model, but there's a lot of similarities to what we have proposed with CFMT.  But, as I said earlier, Commissioner, we have promised to, and we will try to do more.  Whether or not we're successful, only time and experience is going to tell us.  We will try, and we give you our commitment, and give our commitment to the city and the citizens of Vancouver.  I think ethnic television can be done better.  With all due respect, I think the only way it can be done better is if you get some new blood.  You know what you're going to get if you licensed our competition.  And they do a nice job, and whether or not they can be as sensitive to Vancouver's ethic communities as I think they are in Toronto, only time will tell.  I don't think they can do as good a job as people that live and breathe and work here, but maybe they can.  I don't know.  But I would suggest to the Commission that this is an opportunity with some new people.  We've got financial strength.  You don't have to worry about a financial problem.  The shareholders are committed to this and putting in their own money to make this license work.  You've got experience, you've got the passion.  And I think, give us a chance and I think we'll surprise you; we're going to do it better than it's been done in the past.

 

2028    MS. DEOL:  And I think it would be good for the viewer ship to be part of that success.  You know, there is that too.  There's that pride in your city; pride, that yes, local people have stepped up to bat and are ready to do this, you know, and take that ball home.

 

2029    MR. SEGAL:  I'm not sure that I didn't misunderstand the question, so I'm going to ask you again whether my understanding of the question is correct or not.  What you said, Commissioner Cardozo, is why can this television station not be run with ownership in Toronto and with good local management.  Was that the question?

 

2030    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Not quite.  If somebody else, and I'm not even suggesting your competitor, but some other company from the east, hired this whole team, theoretically, could they not do as good a job as you feel you can do?

 

2031    MR. SEGAL:  Let me respond to that in my way and from my experience.

 

2032    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So long as we're dealing with the same question.

 

2033    MR. SEGAL:  I believe that if you are to run a successful company, you are dependent on the people that you choose and the responsibility that you delegate and the monitoring that you provide.  By the same token, they do report to head office and the major decisions are made in head office.  And if you have six branches, if you have one branch that isn't so great, you start to cut budgets.  Instead of addressing the problem, you address the symptoms.  And so you can't run, particularly this kind of requirement, you cannot run by remote control.  You've got to understand the marketplace.  That's the same old story about raincoats at the wrong time of the year, or boots when it rains or snows.  We sell boots in Vancouver when it snows in Montreal. 

 

2034    So I believe that there is a significant difference between running a station of this nature.  If it wasn't ethnic, there's lots of synergy, but because it is ethnic, the local understanding of the marketplace is so significant, and so the decisions will be made locally.  And it isn't a question of getting on the phone; it's a question of walking across the hall to arrive at a decision that is made today because it's important today, rather than a week from today.

 

2035    MR. MEIKLEJOHN:  Commissioner, if I may, please.  We explored this in our focus group and the participants felt that local ownership was very important, in that when they arrived and as they've developed and integrated in the community, local people have nurtured them and helped them, and they were very,  very, intense, if you will, on this particular topic.

 

2036    MR. LEE:  Commissioner, to be successful you have to have the right partners, and I've been dealing with my partners here for 20, 30, 40 years, and we have a rapport of how we resolve problems and so on.  So I think if someone came to me, I would want to make sure that I had the right partners.  I think that's very, very important in running a successful business.

 

2037    MR. KANE:  Commissioner Cardozo, I wonder if I would just add to this in the context of your comment on the Broadcasting Act and I certainly agree with you that the Broadcasting Act is not explicit in terms of local ownership, but there are some guidelines in the Broadcasting Act that have been fleshed out by the Commission in its ethnic policy which, in my submission, leads you very strongly towards local ownership.  I'll come back to that in a moment.

 

2038    In an answer to your question about an eastern company coming and purchasing a company in Vancouver, there's an intriguing example of an eastern company coming to Vancouver and purchasing the cable television company, and the Commission will be well aware that in 1980, Roger's came to the west and purchased Premier, which included the Vancouver cable system.  And we have an intriguing analogy, because in the hearing which the Commission conducted to approve the transaction, there were strong concerns expressed by interveners with respect to the fact that there would now be potential domination of the cable industry in British Columbia by interests located in central Canada.  And the Commission addressed it by pointing out that the Commission does encourage local ownership in the right circumstances, but made a decision to approve the transaction.  And listen to the circumstances that existed at that time.  The Commission noted the fact that there was decentralised management in the Rogers system in Ontario and Alberta and recognized that that had been working so we could have decentralised management here.  That satisfies one of the factors that was present. 

 

2039    It also pointed out that there were local boards of advisors, just as you might have here. You could have a local board of advisors as well.  But, in addition to all of that, there was minority interest in Rogers from the west, and over and above - and thus us really quite remarkable - over and above that, there was a commitment made that the directors of Rogers would be proportional to the number of cable subscribers from the west, and that's over and above the level of shareholding in the company.  And this resulted in 40 percent of the directors of Rogers coming from Western Canada.

 

2040    I think that's an extremely interesting example, and that's with a cable television system that doesn't have control over what is carried on the system, and that is simply, as you know, a distribution situation.  I would suggest to the Commission, as you've indicated, Commissioner Cardozo, the Broadcasting Act is general, and it should be, because it's a framework.  But, as you know, in the object section of the Broadcasting Act in Section 6 of the Broadcasting Act, the Commission can flesh out the Act through the pronouncement, which it does, in policy statements.  And I would submit that the ethnic policy statement -- policy rather, speaks overwhelmingly in terms of serving and reflecting a local community, which in my submission leads you naturally to local ownership.  Now, is it definitive?  Absolutely not because neither the Broadcasting Act, nor the policy, should lead you to a specific answer; it should guide you to that answer.  But in my submission, the Act and the policy, guides you very clearly towards local ownership. 

 

2041    MR. SCHATTENBERG:  Commissioner, if I could also point out, we asked our respondents in our survey directly, whether they felt it was important that the proposed multicultural television station should be run by a local Vancouver company, rather than a corporation from Toronto, and 79 percent of our ethnic population said that they felt it was important that the station be run by local people and 83 percent of the mainstream population.  So, really, the population, both mainstream and ethnic, agreed that they feel it's very important that local people should be in charge of the multicultural station here.

 

2042    MS. DEOL:  I just had one more thought, that I think it makes a strong statement, not just that it's local ownership, but that it's multi-ethnic ownership, that we have come full circle.  We're not asking for your airtime, we now own the station.  I think that's a very strong statement.

 

2043    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I hear you and maybe I can turn to Mr. Kane again on that point in terms of ownership.  Is it your sense that the Act or the policies guide us in terms of ethnic ownership with regards to -- or multi-ethnic ownership in terms of a station such as what's applied for here?

 

2044    MR. KANE:  Absolutely, Commissioner Cardozo.  As I say, you start from Section 6 in the Broadcasting Act.  You can also look at Section 3 in terms of the broadcasting policy, and there are some general guidelines that lead you towards a direction which, as the Commission stated in the Rogers/Premier decision encourages local ownership in the appropriate circumstances.  But then when you look at what the Commission has done in terms of its ethnic policy, perhaps to cite for the record a couple of paragraphs that I would note would be paragraph 40, "The Commission is of the view that a primary responsibility of over-the-air, ethnic radio and television stations should be to serve and reflect their local community."  And it is my submission that the best way to serve and reflect a local community is through local ownership.

 

2045    There's another interesting comment in paragraph 46, and this is in the context of a discussion on network, and whether networks should be permitted with respect to ethnic radio and television.  The Commission quoted groups that supported a national network, and then it quoted those who opposed it.  And the description of those who opposed it is interesting and, in my submission, very relevant to the discussion over the last few days.  Those opposing were of the view that the ethnic composition of cities in Canada is so diverse that it is difficult to conceive of a national schedule that would be relevant across the country.  In their view, the national network concept would have the potential to displace, or at least fail to support locally relevant content.  I know the Commission has had that discussion and I suspect we'll have more of it with our group.  The Commission then went on to say that any applicant for a national ethnic television network should clearly identify how the proposed network would satisfy the needs of a range of ethnic groups in the local markets to be incorporated in the proposal.  And, in my submission, it always comes back to local.

 

2046    And the one last thought I would make with respect to network, Commissioner Cardozo, is that the Commission will know a network can be composed of two stations.  That's all it takes in terms of the definition of a network.  And, in my submission, in summary, the Act and the policy lead us inevitably towards a preference.  If you have a choice, it's my submission, that the Act and the policy lead you to a preference for local ownership.

 

2047    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  It's a very helpful discussion.  Everybody has participated in it.  Obviously, you feel very strongly, clearly, about what you're saying, but I hope you understand that from our perspective it isn't that crystal clear.  As you say, it may guide us, in your view, in one conclusion.  I think one could argue that it could guide us to the other conclusion. 

 

2048    The other important issue is a good application.  If you've got a terrible application, we couldn't say local overrides everything else, right?

 

2049    Let me ask you about CHMV and your radio station, what you felt that has helped you, or what lessons do you have from that that apply, from running a radio station that would apply to a television station?

 

2050    MR. HO:  One of the key things that we learned from running the radio stations, the difficulties of covering all communities.  You know, there's so much things that one wants to do, one has to do, really, in order to cultivate the community and try to make sure that the community understands that this is Canada, that we integrate these people into the Canadian system, having to deal with all those different languages.  We also have to assess as to which language is the main part of the language that will generate a reasonable amount of economic return so that we can fund the rest.  It is very different from a conventional radio station, meaning whether it's AM or FM.  They have a very low operating cost, as compared to our type of radio station because if you want to meet up with the standard, we have to spend a certain amount of money that is going to have a quality type of program.  That's without question.  But it's not overspending.  We have to be very careful also what we spend.  That's on the economic side.

 

2051    Then on the culturally sensitivity,  as far as, and further to, how the groups and which story are we going to be selecting, it's a vast amount of research consulting that we have to do amongst the different ethnic groups of people.  You can't just sit in the office and read a piece of paper that is national, that applies to all the AM or FM stations and says this is the format that works, or that format that works.  It doesn't work in an ethnic radio station at all.  You actually have to go through the experiment of different categories that you have to do.  A lot of times we fail.  But it's just that one or two times that we're successful.  That's going to bring, not only joy and satisfaction, but also a certain part of economic success as well.  And it's a lot more difficult to operate, as I'm saying, than the ordinary conventional radio because there's so many different issues that we have to deal with.

 

2052    And lastly, I'm a Chinese, first generation.  Obviously, I know the Chinese community very well.  We also have to run twelve different languages, including Chinese.  In other words, aside from Mandarin or Cantonese, we have to know 10 other communities.  We have to make sure that these 10 communities are satisfied.  We quite often do not know what our producer has been airing.  And quite often what we found out about what the producer is airing, that is, having some sort of impact, whether it's positive or negative, whatever, usually comes late, and we don't want that to happen with our television.  We're also making steps to improve that in our radio station because you have to have people who are keeping you informed, who understand the culture, who understand the language that let you know what's happening in your radio program, in the case of what's happening in your television program.  Be responsible and be accountable because, after all, I'm the license holder of CHMV and if my producer does anything wrong, I'll be responsible.  We cannot let the producer just, over the year say, I resign today, I appoint somebody else.  There has to be a procedure, proper process.

 

2053    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  How many languages do you have on your radio station?

 

2054    MR. HO:  Right now we have 13 languages, in addition -- our minimum requirement is 12.  We have 13, plus aboriginal - the only aboriginal in town at this moment, two hours a week.

 

2055    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  And it's a 100 percent ethnic languages, is it?

 

2056    MR. HO:  Yes, 100 percent ethnic language, yes.

 

2057    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And the reason you wouldn't look at 100 percent for television is because the costs are much higher on television?

 

2058    MR. HO:  Well, two areas.  Costs, it's a lot higher than radio and radio is a lot more difficult to sell than television.  Television somehow is easier, if, provided you have the conventional type of program.  One of the difficult areas that we are also facing in our radio station is, we don't have ratings.  BBM doesn't rate us.  The only thing that we can do is to show the result, what kind of result we have.  And the result has been tremendous because, really, I think a lot of people are missing in this multicultural ethnic programming.  They only put their heart into the English program because that's where the money is.  But there's a whole virgin land in the multicultural side of things, but you need a certain amount of economic success in order to mature and cultivate the multicultural side of the business. 

 

2059    In our situation, when I talk about no rating, it's really a difficult situation.  All these rules are from CRTC, a lot of them that we have to comply, with a few exceptions.  It takes a lot of effort that we have to do, and it's out of respect that we're doing it as well because this is what the CRTC requires and that's what we will do.

 

2060    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Not because it makes good sense?  Isn't that why we do things here?

 

2061    MR HO:  I'm sure you've also done a lot of these studies as well that make sense.  But one of the difficult things, like I said, we have to show results, and that's what we're doing.  There has to be a result. 

 

2062    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Just two or three more quick questions before we break for lunch.  You said, Mr. Ho, earlier that you would be helping newer producers, or the ethnic producers certainly, or the independent producers especially with the Lifestyle programming, but as I look at your team, you have experience in ethnic broadcasting and radio and, Mr. Holtby, you have experience in television broadcasting, but neither of you, or nobody else in your group, has experience in multilingual television broadcasting.  How do you make up for that?

 

2063    MR. HO:  That's what we call diversity of experience here.  That really counts.  As I'm saying before, the business sense, the common sense, the passion, you know, all of these will count, not just one segment of it, but a general segment of the whole thing here. 

 

2064    Mr. Segal will tell us, like, what's happening in the retail sales and all these different things.  Bob, our chairperson, who is very in tune with the real estate side of things, and by the way, nobody knows he owns one of the largest auto dealerships in town too.  I mean, if you drive a Honda, you probably bought a car from him - the top sales in North America.

 

2065    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  I think I did.

 

2066    MR. LAU:  Commissioner Cardozo, I'm Geoffrey Lau.  You'll probably wonder why I'm here.  I'm one of the shareholders of the group and I'm very excited about these projects.  Actually, I'm in the real estate and financial business, but my wife has been taking a very intensive interest in the community.  She's an opera performance; she has done a lot of community work.  As a result, she was invited to be -- she served on the board of Fairchild TV for nine years, and she had a lot of meetings, and she talked to a lot of audiences.  She's very familiar with the program, she's very familiar with what the community want, so she tell me to be here.

 

2067    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  It's an interesting management structure.

 

2068    MR. HO:  To conclude this whole thing here, yes, they may not see a whole lot of type of, these types of television person, television experience or whatever, but I believe with the guidance from the board, their business and common sense, their passion, plus the complementary type of experience between Doug and myself, I believe that we have a --

 

2069    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Who are the principles that are going to run the show?

 

2070    MR. HO:  Pardon me?

 

2071    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Who are the principle people, your senior staff who will run the station?

 

2072    MR. HO:  We're going to hire the best people in town that's going to be running this 24 hours a day for us.  I mean, all of us have --

 

2073    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Among you, between Mr. Ho and Mr. Holtby, you're going to be the Chairman?

 

2074    MR. LEE:  Well, I'll tell you, we're going to rely on these two to tell us, and our hired general manager as to what to do, because they're the experts.  But I think the three of us, the other three shareholders have lots of experience in business, and I treat this like any other businesses that I've run, or acquired, or ran.  Like James said earlier, I've been through five recessions and my two, Geoffrey Lau and Joe's been seven, I'm sure Jeffery's been four.

 

2075    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  We've got 15 recessions between you.

 

2076    MR. LEE:  So the ups and downs, we survived.  So I think with that experience, and plus their experience in the business, I think we have a very good chance.

 

2077    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Well, just on that, I observe that the shareholders, I guess two of you have a lot of experience in broadcasting, but the other three - I don't want to say money guys - but is the reason that the five of you are together is because you've got access to potential advertisers, business, whatever, to make this thing fly because some would argue that a stand-alone multicultural station is a pretty hard thing to run when -- well, stand-alone to the extent there will be a radio station as well, so there'll be synergies to that extent only?

 

2078    MR. SEGAL:  Commissioner Cardozo, I have, in my experience, acquired many companies that I technically had no knowledge in terms of how to operate it, from the woodworking business to producing steel shelving and whatever, and I'm a firm believer that there is a complement of personnel out there, and I would only entertain the best, even if they have to come from Rogers.  So, I believe --

 

2079    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I see the makings of a very interesting partnership happening here.

 

2080    MR. SEGAL:  There is a pool of talent out there, and half of the business is technical and the other half of the business is common sense and business experience and financial responsibility, so I don't think that's going to be a problem.

 

2081    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Well, those cover my questions for now in terms of the localness and the local management aspect.  After lunch we'll cover the advisory board and other issues relating to the community feedback and social issues.

 

2082    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  We will now break for lunch.  The beepers and telephones of people must be turned off and, please, if you see those who don't turn them off, you can be my police.  We'll be back in an hour, 10 to 2:00.

 

 

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1245 / Suspension à 1245

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1350 / Reprise à 1350

 

 

 

2083    MR. HO:  In making TV, you have to have a little bit of everything, but the main part, as I wanted to point out in our TV, programming is at heart -- of course, amongst the programming, I think news is the heart of the programming.  In here, we have paid great attention in bringing the news items.  And the news items we will be covering in these segments here, two hours in the morning, two hours in the evening prime time, will be top-notch type of, very time-sensitive information.  We're not going to be, you know, dance and song and these types of cultures.  We'll have rooms in other parts of the programming that's going to be broadcasted out, but the news is definitely the news.  You know, it will have to be very sensitive as to the timing, how fast that we want to react to a certain situation.  There are a lot of situations the reaction will be very fast.  We have all these mobile newsgathering automobiles that we're going to be using, and one of the things that we are committing to such a great extent, being news gathering mobiles and microwave gathering, microwave transmission mobiles that we'll use in this whole situation is that we want to be making sure that whatever's happening in the city of the Vancouver, especially in the ethnic communities, we want to be there first, we want to broadcast to our audiences first, we want to have the latest information.  You know, it is important for the ethnic community to know it's not dance and music.  Those are not news items per se.

 

2084    MS. DEOL:  Also, I think, you know, that all of us are very aware of the fact that we're not just stereotypical song and dance people.  There's a lot more to us.  I think the people on the advisory board and the owners, when it comes to stereotyping, we have been stereotyped and to fight against that it's sort of built into us, it's part of our make-up.  So I think that all of us would make that a sort of vested interest, that we have more on the air about our people, whoever that is, than, you know, yes, the arts and the cultural part and that way matters, and the news matters.  But then there's the human interest. Then there's the things that we all talk about over dinner amongst our friends, amongst our families, amongst our co-workers, and those things may not be talked about on mainstream television.  I think within the context of that news hour there is room for issues like intercultural marriage, arranged marriages, you know, how much is too much when it comes to meshing the cultures; at what point are you a sell-out; at what point are you a coconut in our culture.  And I think these are all things, you know, and that's just a bit, that's just a surface.  There are a lot of issues that we all discuss in our every day lives that I think are common, that everybody would have an interest in hearing about it and talking about it, and, you know, definitely there is a lot more to multi-ethnic television than just news stories that focus on multi-ethnic people and, you know, singing and dancing.

 

2085    MR. SEGAL:  Commissioner Cardozo, I don't believe that the purpose of the video was to give you an example of the type of broadcast.  I think it was primarily, and I can tell you frankly, I only saw it once, and it brought tears to my eyes, to be able to see that there is such a diverse cultural ethnic group in this city.  And there were many of the smaller ethnic groups that were represented in that video and I didn't realize that they were so vibrant.  And that was the purpose of the video - not to show you want is going to be broadcast on the news, but to show you how diverse this community is.

 

2086    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner Cardozo, in closing, I'd just like to say that - and I won't go through how we would develop these shows, I went through that quite extensively with Commissioner Pennefather - but the one thing we know for sure is that there will be shows that we think on paper they look great and they're the right thing to do, but in reality it doesn't work.  That just happens.  The creative process, that's what it's all about.  There's no formula; I've never yet seen one.  But we will live or die on our ability to attract an audience.  It's got to be excellent; it's got to be reflective and relevant to our viewers and excite them - excite them, make them sad, bring out emotions.  I mean, it's got to be a challenge.  But I think with the resources that I've seen in our community with Baljit and others - we've identified 25 - that we will produce quality programs that are going to attract an audience.  And I think in the fullness of time, the ethnic part of the schedule will continue to grow.  I hope that when we come back for renewal that we'll be telling you that we want to do more ethnic, or we are, in fact, we are doing more than what we said in the application.

 

2087    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thanks for that.  It's helpful to get a sense of how what you see -- what you would put on the screen would reflect the local community.  And, Ms. Sangra, I hope you won't take my criticisms too hard, for two reasons.  One is I don't live here so I won't be watching.  But, second, it's clear that your work produces a lot of discussion, as it has here, and that is certainly the object of good film and good TV, or one of the objects. 

 

2088    What are the means of feedback for the advisory committee?  How will you get feedback beyond the networks that each one of you have?  Would you be looking at town hall meetings, or websites, or anything like that?

 

2089    MS. DEOL:  All of the above.  We'll be doing town hall meetings.  We'll be doing websites.  We'd be probably going through viewer mail, you know, sort of, as a regular thing.  Yeah, we are -- we are out there.

 

2090    MR. HO:  Can I take this opportunity to talk to you about the website?

 

2091    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Sure.

 

2092    MR. HO:  One of the key things, our station, AM13, CHMV, is the first pioneer, as a matter of fact, in the website development in the multicultural radio station in Canada.  As soon as we announced -- you know, it takes a lot of resources, a lot of air, a lot of manpower and a lot of talent to develop the site, and one of the first things that we have noticed, as soon as we have developed the site and people knew about us, we get a lot, a lot of information that's coming over from our audiences.  One of the key things that we also found out is that radio stations no longer -- or electronic media is no longer just simply this electronic media.  It's no longer people picking up the phone and call and want their opinion to be heard.  In electronic, especially these inter-reactions media, we have programs right now in our radio station actually, for two hours in the afternoon every day, and that's from 3:00 to 5:00, and then late evening, past midnight actually, on Friday and Saturday we have also another two programs that's also Internet based inter-reaction.  We found out that there's a lot of inter-reactions that's coming from the community.  The phone line, when it's busy, you can get through.  It's different from Internet.  When they send opinion, you see it.  And not only that, a whole bunch of other people see it too.  And not only that, it's not limited to our region.  All over the world they are seeing it.  And we have people just keep on communicating with us, and some of these people they may be in Hong Kong, and they cannot have their voice aired, or talk about it over the air, and we get immediate response from them.

 

2093    I believe the situation is the same with our improvement, or the programming ideas, or the town hall meetings, et cetera.  I mean, we could have  virtual town hall meetings by just having everybody go on-line, we can talk about this whole thing, I mean, if the time requires.  I mean, there's a lot of ideas that's being developed at this moment.

 

2094    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Would this be the mechanism for complaints as well?

 

2095    MR. HO:  This will be part of the mechanism because the complaints, sometimes the really big complaints comes.  I'm sure the CRTC will receive a letter as well, whether it's through fax, or through mail, phone calls, emails, we have people coming to our radio station at times and telling us that certain programs they like, certain programs we should include, et cetera; all in a very positive, constructive way.

 

2096    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I'd like to turn to scholarships which Mr. Segal and I would term as peanuts.  This is not just my view imposed on you, I'm just absorbing from your group.  This is 210 over seven years, or per year for seven years?

 

2097    MR. HO:  That's per seven for per seven years.  Not each year.  Seven years.

 

2098    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Over seven years?

 

2099    MR. HO:  Over seven years.

 

2100    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You had mentioned something about other scholarships.  Those are just individual scholarships that other directors have set up on their own; is that so, or were you suggesting there might be more?

 

2101    MR. LEE:  We're doing it every day.

 

2102    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Well, on your own, that's fine.  But what I just want to get a handle on is, is, is as far as MultiVan is concerned, it's the 210 over seven years?

 

2103    MR. HO:  In all the things that we do, we've been very conservative and that's the minimum amount that we will do.  We'll do more as time goes along.  And over the years we have always committed more - I'm talking about my own ethnic station here - I've always over-committed, not under-committed, everything that we have done up to this moment -- over delivered, I'm sorry.

 

2104    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Tell me a couple of quick things about it.  How will it be publicized and how will recipients be assessed?  And I understand that the purpose is for students who will be studying broadcasting; is that correct?

 

2105    MR. HO:  Yes.  It's geared towards the broadcasting students that are in the studying field, and generally - perhaps we have a different or more advanced method - but how we have done it in our multicultural radio station and stuff, we have always taken the advice from the university, that department, where there's been the professor or the director, they have their own committee as to who they qualify should get the scholarship, and we will provide these scholarships to the department and then they'll let us know who has been rewarded these scholarships.

 

2106    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Oh, so the individual departments will provide the scholarships as opposed to you doing it directly to the students?

 

2107    MR. HO:  Well, and then, of course, the students will know.  Quite often, like I say, they will have knowledge of it.

 

2108    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay, yes.  And when you say studying broadcasting, is that how to do broadcasting or, you know, different roles in broadcasting, or is it more broadcasting policy?

 

2109    MR. HO:  It covers everything:  communication, journalism, acting, you know, everything that has to do with -- appropriate that has to do with the electronic.  You know, it's going to be a field that I believe if there's a talent that's out there that's related to this field, we will be looking at it.  We'll be hearing the advice from the institution.

 

2110    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  On cultural diversity, you mention in page 12 of your oral presentation -- I had it marked in my copy and I can't find it.  Okay. "We have made programming commitments which exceed the ethnic policy and have undertaken to ensure that even the English programming aired contributes to the overall diversity MultiVan will offer to all viewers in the Lower Mainland."  Could you just give us more of a sense of what that is, what you mean by that in terms of the English programming?

 

2111    MR. HOLTBY:  What we were referring to specifically there, Commissioner, was, to the extent possible, we would want the schedule, the foreign -- I'm talking about the foreign American product, to just be sensitive to - and I discussed that with Commissioner Pennefather, and I used the show Degrassi, but there was the Cosby Show, and there's others - to the extent possible, we have to recognize what we are, and what we are is an ethnic television station, and we would like to reflect that in all, whether it's American, Canadian or acquired or produced locally.

 

2112    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Is that something you may do, or is that a commitment that you're willing to make that we could put in here?

 

2113    MR. HOLTBY:  It is a commitment that we will do our best.  I mean, it's obviously --

 

2114    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I think that when we talk about reflecting diversity, we're not saying that every single program has to reflect diversity, but certainly overall the programming - and in this case we're talking about English - would, in some way, (a) not be offensive, but (b) be inclusive of --

 

2115    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, there's no question that there would never be anything that was offensive.  We just wouldn't have it on the station, or stereotyping shows.  It just wouldn't happen.  But it's a commitment that we would do our best and it's a commitment that we've given to the advisory council and we give to the Commission, and we would expect to be able to review that with the Commission and with our advisory council that we will do our best.  In fact, there could be instances where we need to seek their advice of which show they think is more appropriate for  particular time periods, and we would undertake to do that.

 

2116    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay, so just to be clear, you're willing to, for there to be a commitment - I'm just asking hypothetically - you're willing to have a commitment in your license that you would ensure that your English language foreign programming would reflect diversity -- cultural and racial diversity, something along those lines?

 

2117    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes, yes, absolutely.  I mean, we're sensitive to what our responsibilities are and we undertake to, in every day part, to do our absolute best.  And, certainly, we would never have anything that was a negative portrayal.  It just wouldn't happen.

 

2118    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You're aware of the CAB task force on cultural diversity.  Are you prepared to be part of that and contribute towards that?

 

2119    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes, we would.

 

2120    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  On closed captioning, let me ask you a couple of fairly detailed questions.  You'll be aware that we have been requiring licenses to commit to providing captioning to 100 percent of English news, including live segments, and 90 percent of English programming by condition of license.  Is that something you could abide by as a condition of license?

 

2121    MR. HOLTBY:  We would agree with that, commissioner.

 

2122    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Tell me about the subtitling, or the closed-captioning in other languages.  You had made a commitment about Chinese character subtitling with respect to closed captioning.  What is your sense of where technology is in terms of especially the non-Roman numeral?

 

2123    MR. HO:  At this moment, the Asian languages as probably being the most advance ones, I would say the Japanese, Korean and Chinese being the easiest one to do at this moment because, you know, naturally, they are, if you take a look at the country, these are the countries which also have quite a bit of electronic advancement.  They've been putting heavy emphasis in this area.  As towards languages other than the ones I've mentioned, I think there's a few - well, I wouldn't even say a few, they are still in the development stage at this moment, and it's a matter of availability in how advanced the technology has been -  but at this moment, aside from the one I have said, I have not encountered anything that is more, how shall I put it, that has been  --

 

2124    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Advanced?

 

2125    MR. HO:  Is advanced enough for us to do.

 

2126    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What about other languages like Russian, Greek, Arabic, Urdu?

 

2127    MR. HO:  Urdu, definitely not in that category as yet.  Russian, if you notice, we have not programmed a program that is in our program, but if there is technology that is available, we certainly will be looking at to do, such as, like I say, the Korean and Japanese probably will be the next one to add on in addition to the Chinese language.  So the advancement, the technology advancement is there. We are just going to keep on adding to it because our technology here will be the latest technology equipment that we'll be buying, so we'll be accommodating that.

 

2128    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So in terms of third languages then, the only ones you're willing to make a -- or what kind of commitment could you make in terms of third languages?

 

2129    MR. HO:  The third language right now in our application, we're making a commitment for the closed-captioned language in Chinese.  At this moment we have 3.5 to 6.3 hours per week for Chinese at this moment, and I would do a minimum of 3.5 and increase it from there, and I would say we'll do a minimum of one third language in, you know, we will increase it as we go along because it is, in my dealing with the languages, like the other ones, we believe it is fairly simple for us to do and it is not going to be a humongous task for us, so we can start with that and we will increase it as we go along.  It is for the best interest of our audiences anyway.  We like to have more audiences.

 

2130    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  And I assume that when you come across programming that does have closed-captioning in other languages, you'd be prepared to run that as well?

 

2131    MR. HO:  That's for the benefit of everyone, yes, we definitely will.

 

2132    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In terms of described video, what commitments are you willing to make in terms of described video?  I understand you've undertaken a number of locally produced TV specials with described video that will be included in the production.

 

2133    MR. HO:  I don't quite understand the question.

 

2134    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In terms of described video, which is providing audio description for television programming for the visually impaired, what commitments are you willing to make?

 

2135    MR. HO:  There's one thing --

 

2136    MR. MOY:  Maybe if I can join in, Commissioner,  in our deficiency letter, you will notice at page 9 of that letter where we had said that we would be technically capable of delivering described programming via the SAP signal, of course, so we -- obviously, we understand that this is a very important service to the community, so we will follow all the developments.

 

2137    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And will that be for English and for third language programming?

 

2138    MR. MOY:  For the English, for the acquired English that is?

 

2139    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Yes.

 

2140    MR. MOY:  I think for the acquired English it will come down to subject to availability of course.  And on the English ethnic language that we're producing ourselves, I would say that that would not be a problem, and on the third language, that usually is more of a challenge, but we will do our best to provide that as well.

 

2141    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In terms of gender portrayal and the violence codes, do you plan to be a member of the CBSA, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council?

 

2142    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

2143    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And you would abide by those?

 

2144    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And with regard to employment equity, currently your radio station has less than a hundred employees, I would think?

 

2145    MR. HO:  Yes.  We have about 35 full-time and 50 part-time for one small radio station.

 

2146    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So you file your employment equity reports with us at the Commission.  If you were to have a television station, you would then likely have more than a hundred, and you would report to Human Resources Development Canada and be monitored by the Human Rights Commission?

 

2147    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

2148    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Well, those are my questions.  Thanks very much.  Thanks for you help.

 

2149    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Commissioner Cardozo.  Commissioner Wilson, please?

 

2150    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Good afternoon.  I'm the last one.  I do the clean-up as well, so you're on the home stretch.  I'm going to begin by asking you a few questions about your financial statement, and I want to look at the studies that you had done at the programming model, your sources of advertising, synergies with -- the financial and operational synergies with CHMV, and I'll probably have a few other questions just to wrap up, as well as some technical questions, so just so you sort of know where we're going with discussion. 

 

2151    I did want to say that I've been listening with a lot of interest to your conversations with my colleagues, and there's quite a passionate discussion about the role of passion in your application, and I guess what I wanted to say was that having come out of the broadcasting industry myself, that passion is what gives life to the programming, but money is what makes the programming go to air.  And so I'm going to start probing the financial assumptions to see because it's great to have a vision, but you want to share that vision with a lot of people, and whether or not the shareholders are accustomed to doing good work and giving back to the community, from what I can tell, this is not a not-for-profit corporation.  I think all of you are fairly shrewd businesspeople and probably are looking at making some money out of this,  so that's what I want to take a look at with you during the next few minutes.

 

2152    On your financial statements, and these are just sort of small questions, but maybe you can just help me understand, in your national time sales and your local time sales between years 2 and 3, there's quite a significant increase in the amount of revenue that you're bringing in.  There's $3.6 million increase in national sales and almost $2 million in local; no corresponding increase in expenses, so I'm just wondering what the explanation is for that.  Why do you see such a jump?  It seems very steady in years 1 and 2 and then in the years following that jump, but there is a significant jump between these two years.

 

2153    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, we recognize when you launch a new station, Commissioner, that it take s a while for it to reach its stride.  So what we've done is try to give you a conservative estimate of where we see the revenues coming from and how the growth would be.  As I've said earlier, I think there's a great opportunity in ethnic advertising.  James has some interesting stories related to the Commission about the success that he's had with his radio station.  If you produce top quality programs and you're able to measure the audience, you're going to be able to sell that audience.  It's very much an underserved demographic in Greater Vancouver, and advertisers have told us that if we can demonstrate that we have that audience, that they're there, they want to buy.

 

2154    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So you would attribute the increase in national time sales and local time sales to increased advertising to the ethnic programming?

 

2155    MR. HOLTBY:  It's ethnic, as well as mainstream.  As the Commission is well aware, you get your books, your rating books, but they're always after, following after the event, so we're really not going to be able to demonstrate to the advertisers where these ratings really are until the spring of our first year of operation.  And in my experience in launching television stations is it takes a while to develop the awareness on the dial and the awareness of your programming.  We have to advertise to the audience that we're there and what we have, so it's a building process.  We think that will take approximately two years. 

 

2156    In addition to that, we also have some of our own perceptions of what is going to happen in the marketplace here and the economy generally.  We've seen that interest rates have dropped significantly and the Commission is probably, I'm sure is aware, that this province just had a personal --

 

2157    COMMISSIONER WILSON: Twenty-five percent.

 

2158    MR. HOLTBY:  Twenty-five percent reduction on provincial income taxes.  Of course, there's added immigration and more people as well coming in, ethnics coming into this market.  So taking all of those things into account, we came up with those estimates.

 

2159    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So but after that jump then, it stays steady for the next five years.  So you don't anticipate that you'd be able to build in a similar kind of increment at some point following that?

 

2160    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, again, it's a conservative estimate, and I mean, we don't have rose-coloured glasses on, and we're not going to estimate that we're going to estimate that we can increase by 10  or 15 percent a year. 

 

2161    Those days, I think, are gone, unless you're able to increase that ethnic side.  I think as far as conventional, English-speaking advertising, we're going to grow at the normal rate of four or five percent.

 

2162    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  You suggested that some of that increase would be attributable to ethnic -- I'll just refer to it as ethnic advertising, advertising in --

 

2163    MR. HOLTBY:  Right.

 

2164    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- ethnic programming, but the breakdown of revenues that you draw from English language programming, versus ethnic programming remain fairly stable right across the business plan at 80 percent.  And you don't see a corresponding increase in that table that you submitted where you break out the revenues?

 

2165    MR. HOLTBY:  Our ethnic advertising, if I remember correctly, does increase faster than our overall advertising.  But again, I would say to you, Commissioner, we try to be conservative.  I think it would be -- it wouldn't be prudent to design a business plan that showed that you could do 10  or 15 percent increase in ethnic advertising.  It would beg another question, I would think, from you.

 

2166    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mm-hmm.

 

2167    MR. HOLTBY:  So we try to be conservative, but I personally believe there's a great opportunity, and I think the other applicant does as well.  It sounded like that yesterday.

 

2168    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Under the line, Other, you show $100,000 right across seven years.  This is in your financial operations chart from section 4.

 

2169    MR. HO:  I would refer the questions to Phillip Moy, please.

 

2170    MR. MOY:  The "Other" of $100,000 that you see in question 4.1, just refers to such items as perhaps Contra, and other miscellaneous items.  I mean, it might include -- maybe there'd be some production income there, but I would say most of it is going to be Contra.

 

2171    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and in Schedule 10 in your Financial Assumptions, under Revenues, you state that there will be $300,000 in infomercials revenue in here, 1.  Where is that reflected?  It's not reflected on the line that's labelled infomercial.

 

2172    MR. MOY:  Yes.  The infomercial revenues, if you look at our Schedule 13, which is page 91 of the application, you would see the $300,000 sitting at the bottom of the page, and I lumped that in the national revenues.

 

2173    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Sorry.

 

2174    MR. MOY:  So, to answer your question, it would sit -- it lies in the national time sales of question 4.1, Financial Operations.

 

2175    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Sorry, page 91, did you say?

 

2176    MR. MOY:  Yes.  Schedule --

 

2177    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So you're --

 

2178    MR. MOY:  Schedules --

 

2179    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- wanting to keep the sales by time period?

 

2180    MR. MOY:  Okay.  You've got Schedule 13, and at the bottom we have Program Sales Infomercials of $300,900 or so.  Right at the bottom right-hand side?

 

2181    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.

 

2182    MR. MOY:  So that number is imbedded in the national time sales that you would see in question 4.1, Financial Operations.

 

2183    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2184    MR. MOY:  Yes.

 

2185    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  It's just there is a line in the chart that the CRTC gives you for infomercial.  So when I didn't see it in there, I guess I must have -- I've got a couple of post-it notes at the bottom of this page, so all right. 

 

2186    So you've just imbedded that in your national time sales, and I guess if we go through those, we can figure out how much from each of those seven years goes to infomercials, or is it fairly consistent right across?

 

2187    MR. MOY:  It's fairly consistent but it does increase over --

 

2188    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.

 

2189    MR. MOY:  -- the seven years.

 

2190    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2191    MR. MOY:  I think on the seventh year, you would see reported, 360,400.

 

2192    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  All right.  I want to look at the Grapheme Koo study, and I guess that the best thing for me to do is address my questions directly to Ms. Butt, but you can decide.  You did 100 telephone interviews for this study?

 

2193    MS. BUTT:  Yes, we did.

 

2194    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And what would you consider to be your margin of error on the numbers that you came back with, for 100 interviews?

 

2195    MS. BUTT:  Traditionally, we actually looked at the sample size from researching the national list of advertisers, and we found that typically, about 500 advertisers would probably make up most of the advertising market.  

 

2196    So we felt that 100 sample is about 20 percent of the population.  So we're pretty comfortable with the margin of error not being too much.

 

2197    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and just to verify that all 100 advertisers that you spoke with were non-ethnic advertisers, you broke out in your study on page 3, I believe you break out 80 percent are marketing managers, 20 percent media planners, and then you talk about 65 percent from Toronto and Calgary, and 35 percent from Vancouver.

 

2198    MS. BUTT:  Actually half of them are ethnic and half of them are non-ethnic, ethnic being that they are currently engaging in ethnic marketing activities, and non-ethnic is that they're not.

 

2199    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2200    MS. BUTT:  But the study shows that a good proportion of the non-ethnic are considering it.

 

2201    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.  I'll get to that.  Did you discuss, when you -- I read your discussion guide and I didn't see anything in there, but did you discuss specifically with any of these advertisers the placement of advertising in the English language programming, or was it -- maybe I can ask it another way.

 

2202    MS. BUTT:  Okay.

 

2203    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I mean, you can tell from reading your study what the purpose was, but what was the purpose of the study from your understanding?  What were you trying to get at?

 

2204    MS. BUTT:  The purpose of the study is three-fold.  First off, it is to gauge whether the advertisers feel that the current ethnic market -- advertising venues for the ethnic market is sufficient.

 

2205    And the second thing is to track whether there are any deficiencies in the current ethnic market, and whether they feel that this could be done better, and whether this could open up more opportunities.

 

2206    And the third one is basically to test the station concept, the Multivan Station concept.

 

2207    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and so I guess I will ask this again, which is, did you discuss with them the placement of advertising in the English language strip programming?

 

2208    MS. BUTT:  We discussed --

 

2209    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Or just sort of the general support --

 

2210    MS. BUTT:  Yes.  We --

 

2211    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- for the concept?

 

2212    MS. BUTT: -- discussed in general whether this station format as described would be appealing to them, and the response that came back is that it is yes, because they feel that -- what appeals to them is a blending approach, and that it would also -- other than appealing to the ethnic market, also appeal to the mainstream population who are interested in learning about other ethnic communities.

 

2213    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  So when you say, I guess on page 24 of the supplementary brief, you referenced the study, and you say that 74 percent of the non-ethnic marketers surveyed stated they have no immediate plans, target ethnic markets, 64 percent of them actually indicated that they will support such a station. 

 

2214    And I hope I'm not being too semantic, but what was your understanding of the word support, that they would actually purchase?  Hopefully, it's more than just supporting it philosophically.

 

2215    MS. BUTT:  The question actually asked was that would it appeal to them, as a potential advertising vehicle.

 

2216    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and do you think they understood when you asked them that question that there was this split between the programming between the ethnic third language, and/or cross-cultural programming, and the strip programming?

 

2217    MS. BUTT:  The strip programming, as in the English program, you're saying?  We are reasonably certain that they understand because what the station format as described would be is the fact that it will appeal -- it will inclusive with strong, multicultural characteristics and it will appeal to the mainstream with a blend of quality and other popular North American programming.  So obviously, it's intrinsic in the fact that it's English, yes.

 

2218    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mr. Holtby, maybe you can answer this question for me, but how did you use this study in the development of your business plan?  I mean, did you have the study done specifically to support your financial projections, or was it just to demonstrate that the potential for ethnic advertising is there?

 

2219    MR. HOLTBY:  The study was really mainly used to reinforce what our views were.  I come from a background -- I've been in television a long time.  So I bring with that some experience, and what you can sell, how you -- you know, what a rating point sells for in this market, and in addition to that, James and his people are actively involved in the ethnic community advertising.

 

2220    So they have a very good feel for what is going on.  That's radio of course, but they have a feel for what is going on there, so the combined resources of our group.  We looked at what the market potential was, we looked at the change in signal line-ups that had transpired, or was about to transpire this fall.

 

2221    So we took all of these things into account to develop this business plan.

 

2222    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  I guess the reason that I'm asking is because, you know when I'm reading through an application, what I'm looking for is material that's going to support the financial projections, and it seemed to me that this study supported the potential for successful ethnic programming advertising in the Vancouver market, and it's something that -- the additional support is the experience of Mr. Ho at CHMB, and the combined experience of the shareholders and the principals involved in service.

 

2223    What I couldn't find in the application was support for the projections on the English side, the English language side.  And so what I'd like to do is ask you to sort of make a link. 

 

2224    I read all the studies, went through them pretty carefully.  I looked at the schedules that you provided, Schedule 13 with the day parts and the breakouts, but I was looking for, like, how did you come up with your sell out rates, and how did you come up with the estimates of what percentage of your ad revenues would come from where?

 

2225    I couldn't find anything in the application that drove those numbers, so that's why I'm sort of probing at this point.  I have some specific questions on each of those, but I wonder if you could sort of address that in a general way.

 

2226    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I don't think you can find a study that is going to prove out what estimates of revenues are.  If you asked somebody, would you be willing to buy a show that will deliver three rating points, they'd say, "Sure.  Show it to me and I'll look at it at that time when I'm doing my plans for my advertiser."

 

2227    But we do know some things for sure in this market.  We know that this market is selling upwards at $800 a rating point, and it is -- we know that local advertisers have a great deal of difficulty buying in this market.  If you have a budget of 50,000 to $100,000 - and that seems like a lot of money - it's impossible to buy conventional television basically in this market. That's why a lot of money goes south of the border to KVOS.  They price lower.  So we know those things.

 

2228    We also know that there's increased -- there is an unmet demand for additional inventory, and things are very, very tight. 

 

2229    When you go into the fall, and the spring, there's a great deal of inventory that's all gone, and there's just really nothing available for advertisers. 

 

2230    So you take all of those things into account, and you say to yourself -- and of course you want to be realistic, and I think our estimates are -- with sell out rates around 45 percent.  So we're saying basically, we're not going to sell very much in some periods, and it's our best estimate.  I think it's conservative. 

 

2231    When you look at what other stations have projected wheat they would do out of Victoria, or what we know KVOS is delivering in this market with their schedule, and we know what their rating points are.  When you look at --

 

2232    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Your sell out rates actually are pretty high.  They're 70 to 80 percent.

 

2233    MR. HOLTBY:  Pardon me?

 

2234    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  For the English language programming, 70 to 80 percent.  That's kind of why I'm asking, because they don't seem that conservative to me.  In fact, I mean your revenue and expense projections are higher than the CFMT application or the LMtv application.  So that's partly why I'm asking you.

 

2235    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I think our revenues are very similar to the other applicant, but I guess what we bring to the table is increased knowledge of this market.  We've been in this market.  We've been selling ethnic advertising in the market.  We've been selling English advertising in this market.

 

2236    When I was referring to the sell out rate, and I used the wrong word, we discounted -- the gross revenue's a function of a number of things.  It's a function of your rating points times the cost per rating times the sell out rate.  And what we did was we discounted all of those things to come out with what we think is a conservative number.

 

2237    Our cost per rating point is substantially below what the going market is here.  Now, that doesn't mean we would sell it like that, because that's bad business to go and prostitute a market, and you know, we've seen it.  The commission's well aware of that in some markets where a new entrant has come in and undersold the market, and it hurts everybody, and we wouldn't want to do that.

 

2238    So we tried to be conservative with all of those various elements, to give what we think is a realistic plan, and Commissioner, you should remember, we're putting our own money on the line here, and our shareholders, the five of us are going to invest 12 and a half million dollars, at least, in this project, and we're confident with these numbers.  We think they're achievable.  We know there's risk.  There is in any business. 

 

2239    Geoffrey Lau said to me one day, "If you're not willing to take any chances, you're not going to do anything."  I mean, if we're looking for a fail-safe --

 

2240    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That's why there are regulators.

 

2241    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.  So you know, we know that there's an element of uncertainty.  We don't think it's very significant and it certainly is -- we can withstand any downturn that would be potential there.

 

2242    MR. MOY:  So I would like add to say that we believe our market research is very extensive, is very complete.  Given that we are from this market, most people are concluding that the South Asian and Chinese markets are what drives an ethnics nation. 

 

2243    But we have to keep in mind that when you add up the Chinese and the South Asian population, sure it's large numbers, roughly 400,000 or so, which is half the ethnic population. But again, this TV station is not just for the Chinese and South Asian.

 

2244    If you add up the revenues for the Chinese and South Asian, they only make up approximately, say, $3,000,000.  I believe it's a little bit less than that, but say $3,000,000 for now.  And we're projecting $17,000,000 is our total revenues.  So if we were to just --

 

2245    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Eighty percent of which comes from the English language programming.

 

2246    MR. MOY:  Yes.  So what I'm saying is that if we were to just do market research on the South Asian and Chinese populations, that's with our focus groups, our quantitative phone survey, as well as our advertiser survey, then I would say we're not really scooping out the entire market.

 

2247    And if we only did those two markets and conclude that we would be able to generate $17,000,000, that wouldn't be fair.  So we went ahead, because the station's actually for the entire multicultural communities of Vancouver.  It's not just for the Chinese, South Asian.

 

2248    So Ipsos Reid, what they did was they conducted a survey, a survey to everyone at large, the English-speaking mainstream people, the Koreans, the Chinese, South Asians, the Europeans as well. 

 

2249    So we were complete in trying to scope out everybody's viewpoint of our concept, and then we went ahead and talked to the advertisers, instead of just talking to the ethnic advertisers who already advertising and spending money on the ethnic markets anyways, regardless.

 

2250    So what we did is we extended that sample size.  We wanted to look at the -- call it non-ethnic advertisers.  And what we found was very impressive, and that is, we asked them, you know, are you planning to invest in ethnic advertising in this market, and they said probably not.  I think there's a percentage out there that --

 

2251    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Seventy-four percent.

 

2252    MR. MOY:  Actually Grapheme Koo confirmed that it was a smaller number to begin with.  I believe it's like 15, 20 percent of these non-ethnic marketers were willing to -- or set aside budget for the ethnic market in Vancouver.

 

2253    Then once we read out the concept to them, then they realized, "Oh, okay, it's a combination approach".  It's not just the traditional ethnic TV station that you would see on these specialty TV stations such as Fairchild and some of the others.

 

2254    It does include English language popular North American, Canadian shows as well, and then they realized, "Oh, okay.  Yes.  I can target these markets, which is the conventional market", which we also tested in our Ipsos Reid study, proving that first of all the mainstream people are interested in our concept.

 

2255    In reality that's what the advertisers are looking for.  Show me the proof that you got the viewership.  So we have proven that using our Ipsos Reid study, plus our focus groups.  Because the focus group, we didn't just talk to South Asian and Chinese groups because you wouldn't be complete.  That's two.  I believe that's two ethnic cultures out of 70 or so.

 

2256    So again, you can't conclude that a station is needed, if you only talk to two groups.  So we were complete in talking to all of the entire, you know, 1.8 million population of Vancouver, and we bring that to the advertisers.  The advertisers see that you know, half -- actually 80 percent of the people are interested in this concept which includes ethnic programming, as well as the English language popular North American programs.

 

2257    And then usually what happens is that the advertisers see that there's an opportunity to target the conventional viewers as well as the multicultural viewers as well.

 

2258    And I think if Carolyne's research, which is Grapheme's research would confirm that our English language revenues are realistic, and are achievable when you combine the facts that --

 

2259    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I guess the English language revenues will be driven very much by what kinds of programming you're actually able to acquire and how attractive that programming is to audiences in terms of driving share. 

 

2260    So, and that's some of what I'm trying to get at here, because I feel quite confident, based on what I've read and listening to you that, in terms of building the revenues from the ethnic programming, you'll be very successful at that.

 

2261    But I think there are some challenges associated with the English language programming. Some of which, Mr. Holtby, you've talked about already with Commissioner Pennefather that I want to explore a little bit more because 80 percent of the revenues are coming from that, and I mean that's a much bigger chunk than the 20 percent that you'll draw from the ethnic programming. 

 

2262    So maybe    we can just talk about that with respect to the programming model.  You've talked about the similarity between this model and the model of the other applicant, and in fact that's what's in our ethnic broadcasting policy, the 60/40 split between ethnic and non-ethnic, and the non-ethnic being essentially U.S. strip programming, which drives the revenues for the business plan.

 

2263    It seems so far to have been the only business model that really works for an over the air conventional ethnic station.  There aren't that many of them in the system as you know.  One in Toronto, one in Montreal which has just changed it's business model from 100 percent ethnic because it virtually went bankrupt, as Mr. Holtby is well aware.

 

2264    So you're proposing a number of variations to that, and I just wanted to ask you about them.  Now, you're saying that you're going to do 68 percent.  So it's a 68/32 split between ethnic and non-ethnic instead of the 60/40.

 

2265    Is that 68 something that you would accept by condition of licence, or do you want the standard 60/40 and you'll do as much as you can, given the flexibility?

 

2266    MR. HOLTBY:  Commissioner, we would perhaps accept it as an expectation.  What we've said in prior questioning this morning is that that is what we will launch with --

 

2267    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mm-hmm.

 

2268    MR. HOLTBY:  -- and if we achieve what we've set out to achieve then we would carry on with it. 

 

2269    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Right.

 

2270    MR. HOLTBY:  We think that that's important.

 

2271    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I think you said too you'd like the flexibility, so --

 

2272    MR. HOLTBY:  If it's needed, yes.

 

2273    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  Then you also are proposing 57 percent third language versus the 50 percent requirement, and instead of just U.S. strip programming for your non-ethnic programming, you're also saying that you're going to run some Canadian, maybe something like DeGrassi. 

 

2274    And you're also using different time blocks to deliver the foreign programming than has been used in some of the other models.  CFMT and LMtv both use the morning to deliver U.S. strip programming, talk shows and what not, and you've chosen to go in the afternoon.

 

2275    I'm just wondering what -- as a stand alone operation in the Vancouver market with the challenges that might go along with that, vis à vis program acquisition and you know, building an advertising base from scratch on the national level for the channel, what led you to vary the model as much as you did, right off the bat instead of sort of ramping up to it over a period of time?

 

2276    MR. HOLTBY:  Vary the model in which context?  Where we place the American?  Is that what --

 

2277    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  No.  Well --

 

2278    MR. HOLTBY:  Early morning or --

 

2279    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I think there are four ways in which you varied it.  One is the 60/40, the traditional 60 percent ethnic, 40 percent non ethnic.  The other is the amount of third language.

 

2280    Okay.  You've offered to do more ethnic than non-ethnic, 68 percent.  You've offered to do more third language.  You said you'll do a combination of Canadian and American programming, and you're choosing different times of the day to do it than what's been successful in the past.

 

2281    So when I look at all of these things and the fact that you're a stand alone operation, you've set up quite a challenge for yourself, and I'm just wondering what led you to challenge yourself at that high a level right off the bat, instead of ramping up to some of this?

 

2282    MR. HOLTBY:  All right.  First off, I'd like to comment on the stand alone comment.  Right now, CFMT, for all intents and purposes is a stand alone.  I started a television station in 1974 as a stand alone.  There is no magic to it.  It can be done, and especially, I think in ethnic television, it's good business television.  The only synergy that I can see that you lose by only having one station is perhaps the ability to buy national rights.

 

2283    And as I tried to explain this morning is there's lots of product for national rights available on strip.  There's product that's available through many conventional broadcasters that are not interested in strip.

 

2284    So I don't see that that is an issue.  And if you are local, by the very nature of being local, if you call yourself a local station, you are stand alone.  It's just that you can't have it both ways.  You can't be part of a system and be local.

 

2285    So anyway, I want to start from that premise that we don't see at all this issue of starting the station and being on our own in Vancouver as a detriment.  We see ourselves working with other conventional broadcasters with CFMT, with CJNT.  I mean that is going to happen.  It always has happened and it will happen.  I'm very confident about that.

 

2286    In regards to how we arrived at the change of model, it really was pushed up.  We were designing the application.  It started with the programming, and we wanted to obviously produce a schedule that would be relevant to our constituency.  So that's really how it started.  And out of the core backbones of this schedule is the news element, and it's in prime time and early morning because it will be very relevant to our two communities in the morning and in prime time.

 

2287    So that's how it was arrived at and with the studies that were done and the research and the advice that we had, we built the schedule from there.

 

2288    And then we looked at the schedule and said, "All right.  Now, how does this relate to what is available in the marketing place as far as rating points?"  And when you look at that, the 6:00 to 8:00 time period, we're estimating, I think it's a two rating in that time period.

 

2289    And I think the fact that we would be quite an alternative to what is available, I don't see that as an issue.  As a matter of fact, in 1974, when we launched ITV in Edmonton, we had entertainment programming from 6:00 to 9:00 and then we had our news at 9:00.  And it was a very good strategy for a while.  Then we moved the news to 10:00 and then we had a half hour at 6:00, but it was a way of having an impact in the market place.

 

2290    And we see the 6:00 to 8:00 time period, you know, as the backbone as far as revenue generator.  And again, I don't see any issue about getting product for it.  That's not going to be the problem.  And we know how many people are watching television at that time, and if we just take our fair share based on -- we're going to exceed the two rating.  We've tried to be conservative in our estimates.

 

2291    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Now, this morning you talked about your programming sources and this has to do with the other broadcasters that you might get product from.  And that's really the only sense in which I refer to you as stand alone, because there's been a lot of discussion about the notion that, you know, an individual station is probably going to have more of a challenge buying rights, especially if you're not in Ontario which is a cornerstone market.  Now that point may have been exaggerated but that's the sense in which I was referring to MBDC as a stand alone station in terms of program acquisition for the English language programming.

 

2292    But with respect to that, CHUM and Global are two broadcasters that you talked about this morning, but given that they both have two stations in this market, how much do you think they're going to have left over for --

 

2293    MR. HOLTBY:  Actually, I don't remember mentioning Global.  It may have been in passing.  What I said this morning was that we had had discussions with CHUM --

 

2294    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  CHUM and Craig.

 

2295    MR. HOLTBY:  -- and Craig and CTV.  CTV have one outlet as the Commission knows --

 

2296    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  CJNT Global.

 

2297    MR. HOLTBY:  CJ --

 

2298    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  You said CJNT which is the Global -- it's the Global multicultural in Montreal.

 

2299    MR. HOLTBY:  Oh, Montreal.

 

2300    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.

 

2301    MR. HOLTBY:  I thought you were talking about -- oh, okay.  Working with them, buying with them, absolutely.  I think I'm not sure how much cooperation is going on between CFMT and CJNT, but I would think that it would be quite extensive, and we would like to be part of that as well, if we could.

 

2302    But at the end of the day, we have got the ability to work with others if need be.  And your question was, "How much would CHUM have available?" Probably not a lot.

 

2303    I don't know what their plans are with -- they haven't told me what their plans are with CKVU, but my bet would be that they will not have a lot of inventory.  I don't really think that Craig's would have a lot of inventory available in this market.

 

2304    There is inventory that's not sold in Vancouver.  We know that, and CTV will have inventory available.  So it's not a case where we are having to find a lot of product.  It's very do-able.

 

2305    MR. HO:  I also wanted to add, when we were talking to Craig, there's always a discussion.  We know from the beginning that we do not have a lot of inventories available.  However the synergy with Craig will be buying program, just like they have formulated their synergies with Rogers to purchase program from United States. That Rogers will be broadcasting in one province, they'll be broadcasting in other province, but they're still left over, they were saying.  And perhaps when we have the licensing, they will -- you know, definitely like us to be part of the team to purchase programs together.

 

2306    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  With respect to the Deloitte and Touché study, and perhaps Mr. Rodrigues wants to answer this, we've been talking to the other applicant as well about the validity of some of the projections in view of the terrorists attack in New York on September the 11th, and really the high level on uncertainty. 

 

2307    I know that we did some modelling at the Commission on what advertising revenues might look like over the next few years and we are subscriber to the Conference Board of Canada Reports.  So we had the benefit of their most recent one which came out in August or September.  I'm not sure, but -- September 19th, actually.  So it was a special report on the potential economic impact of the attack in the United States.

 

2308    And I mean much obviously is crystal ball gazing at this point.  We don't really know what the impact is going to be long term, but a good number of the studies that were used in the Deloitte & Touché study as reference points were from the spring, and what we came up with you refer to your projections as being quite conservative.  Ours were even more so.

 

2309    So I'm wondering if you've taken a look at what might happen to your business plan if the advertising growth occur as you've projected in your plan?  If there is an economic downturn, what's the impact?  Have you looked at that?

 

2310    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, as I understand your question is what we do if the advertising targets weren't reached, and my answer to that is that we've given you our commitment of what the minimums will be for this television station, and the shareholders would have to dig in their pockets and support it.  I mean, that's the bottom line.

 

2311    I mean, we're going to start off initially putting in 12 and a half million dollars to launch this station and if in two years we finally need to put in another two and three, we're going to do it.  We will not walk away from the station and we'll not walk away from our commitments. 

 

2312    But, you know much has changed in the last month as you point out, but there are some things that are quite positive as well.  And I'm going to ask Joe Segal to talk about this whole thing, because he's got some very significant thoughts on it, but I just -- the Vancouver Sun Business, there's an article by Michael Campbell, and he's a well-known economist here in town.

 

2313    And Michael is talking about just in the interest rate drop that it's equivalent -- if somebody has $100,000 mortgage of a raise of $2,000. The commodity reductions, coffee, gasoline, and those kinds of things are quite significant.  And the tax, which we've talked about earlier, if somebody's making the average - what is it - $57,000, they would need to receive a $3,300 raise.

 

2314    So we see all of these things, and the market is growing as well, and there's an influx of people.  So there is uncertainty, but we think this province is headed in the right direction.  It's been a great place to grow up in and to have a career in, and we've all had, I guess, our relative up and downs, but we've all survived and worked well.

 

2315    It will continue to grow, and we're very optimistic in the long term.  You have to look at this licence.  It's a seven-year licence that this is a very good market to be involved in, and we think that the future is good.

 

2316    Now, I'll ask Joe to make a couple comments because he is a man on the street, and he --

 

2317    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And he's survived the most downturn.

 

2318    MR. HOLTBY:  He was sharing --

 

2319    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  He has the most experience.

 

2320    MR. HOLTBY:  He was sharing with me the other day of retail sales and how they did drop for a period of time in September and then what happened subsequent so --

 

2321    MR. SEGAL:  I guess, Doug, what you're saying is rich or poor, this is a great province to live in, and I agree with you completely.

 

2322    I'm not an analyst or an economist, but I can tell you this.  I've been a hero for a penny and been a bum for a penny.  And so all of your earnings, your analysts that are predicting the earnings of a company that has been around for a hundred years, and if the company delivers a penny less, the president is a bum.  And if he delivers a penny per share more, he's a hero.

 

2323    So these things are -- there's got to be a little bit of tolerance level because after a while management starts worrying about what it's going to look like in the press rather than running the business.

 

2324    I believe that in this current economic environment there will be a shift, a shift of spending, and if you have spent all of your money in the past, if you still have a job, you're going to be able to spend all of your money in the future.  The fundamental difference is, Doug, said is the fact that you'll have a little more discretionary money to spend.

 

2325    Retail sales, I looked at the number in Women's Wear Daily a couple of days ago.  Retail sales after the September 11th tragedy tanked, and they did in Vancouver, too.  I can tell you that in some of our businesses, sales were down -- well, they were non-existent the first day or two and then down 50 percent and then down 40 percent, and by the end of September, even though we had been on an up trend prior to that, by the end of September, we were flat with the year before.

 

2326    And retail sales in the U.S. where this would have a much more dramatic impact, were down two and a half percent.  That's all.  So it's time for caution.  I heed what you said, that this is not a project that we should be in just to serve the community.  This is not a non-profit project.

 

2327    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  But you're prepared to, if you have to?

 

2328    MR. SEGAL:  It is the same as any other business.  There's a start up period, irrespective of what you're doing, you have an investment.  I look at our projections, and when I look at the -- well, the bottom line, if you want to call it such, never mind the cash flow, because the cash flow is pretty good, but in a bottom line, in year 3 we have a projected loss of $929,000.  And there's always some unknown quantity or unknown occurrence that impacts that, and it can be favourable or otherwise, but at this point, because we're not 100 percent leveraged, there has been a little bit of benefit in terms of the interest rates.

 

2329    The other thing is that we have depreciation in that third of 1,600,000.  So if I take the 1,600,000, and I take the current interest rates, and a difference of about two points on the total, we are close to $2,000,000 in cash flow, and we're projecting a loss of $929,000.  So we should be ballpark $1,000,000 positive in cash flow.

 

2330    And I really believe, since my involvement in this business, I believe that there's great potential in this market place if you really understand the market place.

 

2331    I happen to be a retailer amongst other things, and I sit and I listen to some of the examples that James provides related to his ethnic radio station, and I can just imagine reaching a market place that we have not been able to afford.  Because, simply, we can't afford a national buy, and maybe we can't afford prime time, but we do deal in this province.  There are 800,000 ethnics, and that is a very major proportion of this province, and that's a specific population that we want to reach in our business.

 

2332    So this will give us an opportunity in a way that we may never have thought of spending any money on.  And it may not be a big budget.  It may be 200 or 300,000 a year, but at least we will have the vehicle to reach the consumer.

 

2333    So I don't think the forest industry is going to be in trouble, but the forest industry has been through that cycle.  I've been on a board on the forest industry for 15 years, and I've seen all kinds of problems, and I've seen situations where the bank debt was converted to preferred shares, and I'm not talking about one company.  I'm talking about the whole industry.  And then when the industry turned around, the bank sold those preferred shares and they climbed out.  We've been through that, but we're a little better equipped today to survive those kind of changes, because we've been through them a few times.

 

2334    And so really, we may not be making any money, but we have sufficient cash flow to sustain a situation.  And the forest industry, if you were in, you would go to the top of the building and jump.  But that's not the answer.  This will pass and the Americans will understand, and we will change our system of measurement, and the net result will be that we'll have a more vibrant industry with a better ability to sustain.

 

2335    MR. RODRIGUES:  Commissioner Wilson, I'd just like to add, and echo some of Joe's comments.  Clearly cash flow is absolutely king in an economic environment that we're in right now.

 

2336    I'd like to come back to and comment a little bit on September 11th, the 911, as some of us refer to.  That's a tragic situation that's an immediate current concern to everybody.  This licence looks like it will be granted sometime in late 2002.  I'm sure everybody in the room would hope that the issues of September 11th are long resolved by then.

 

2337    But notwithstanding that, those are issues that you cannot plan for.  I think all you can plan for is you look at things like population growth, the ethnic base within the population growth. 

 

2338    You look at the ownership structure of an organization.  You look at the commitment behind the ownership structure.  You look at the financial resources behind the individuals that are committed to the business case.

 

2339    And those are the things that really give you -- or certainly gave Deloittes the comfort level around the fact that this is certainly a viable entity, and a viable proposition going forward.

 

2340    From my own personal perspective, I'm an accountant, a CA.  I'm a licensed trustee in bankruptcy, been through the recession and slow downs in Ontario a few years ago, living I guess, the slow downs and the economic downturns in Vancouver right now.  And you look at why businesses sometime fail, and the number one reason businesses would fail is lack of ownership or a commitment from management and the people, the shareholders right behind it.

 

2341    The number two reason is cash flow and financial structure.  And I think we had come to a fairly comfortable level around the commitment of this group with respect to the shareholders behind it, and the financial structure, which gave us the comfort around the projections going forward.  Albeit, it is a crystal ball, and certain events will impact what their actual results would be.

 

2342    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Thank you for that.  I wonder if we could just take a look at the sources of projected revenues that's in Schedule 14 of your application. 

 

2343    Before I start asking you sort of specific questions about who would be affected by these, maybe you could just clarify for me the advertisers not currently using radio or television.   Who are they in your application?  Are these ethnic advertisers or English language advertisers?

 

2344    MR. HOLTBY:  They're both, Commissioner.  You said, not using radio or television.  Our model is based on who's not using television.  As I talked about earlier, there are a great deal of retail advertisers that have no ability to get -- or very little ability to get on conventional television, so they're retailers.

 

2345    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2346    MR. HO:  In this case, very particularly were geared towards Mr. Joe Segal's empire there.

 

2347    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.  So the shareholders may be funding the station in other ways, other than direct equity contributions.  It does say radio in the schedule, television or radio.  I think that that's the standard format that we lay out.

 

2348    So in your mind it may just be people who aren't currently using television because they can't afford it on the conventional stations in the market.

 

2349    Increased spending from current radio and television advertisers at 30 percent, who are these people?  These are national, ethnic, local--

 

2350    MR. HOLTBY:  It would be across the board, but of course the greatest dollar amount would be on the national side.

 

2351    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and where would the bulk of the ethnic programming revenue be reflected in that chart?  Obviously you don't want to take any advertising dollars from --

 

2352    MR. HO:  We'll ask Mr. Phillip Moy to answer --

 

2353    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mr. Ho, from CHM, but you don't want to give up any of your advertising.

 

2354    MR. HO:  Well, let's put it this way.  When we talk about radio service, we're talking about radio service in general.  It's not just in the ethnic market, but overall speaking.  And overall speaking we're talking about half a $1,000,000 in all of the radio market at this moment.  So I think the impact on that part is fairly minimal, but if you need any more details, Mr. Phillip Moy here is able to explain to you.

 

2355    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So there might be people using radio, for example, who can't afford to buy television, so they might migrate.

 

2356    MR. HO:  Well, there's a lot of that especially in the -- well, I mean there's a lot of people right now, they're not using anything at this moment, because for the television, what we have found out, when we talk to some agency, they have told us that if you do not spend $40,000 a week on television advertisement, it's meaningless.  Therefore, a lot of these people started to turn over to radio, but what is available over the radio has been extremely competitive in the market as well.

 

2357    But overall, these people are constantly looking for an outlet.  Again, that's why KVOS has it's own survival niche in this market as well.  And obviously this is somewhere that we'll be looking at the same time.

 

2358    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mr. Moy.

 

2359    MR. MOY:  Yes.  On the ethnic revenues, or in our case, because the way we broke it down our revenue productions, the multilingual revenues is projected say, for year one, amounting to about $3,000,000.

 

2360    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2361    MR. MOY:  Those revenues would be, like it's generated in combination from the various sources that you see in your Schedule 14.

 

2362    So there would be some in the category at the bottom where it says, "New revenues which would result from increase spending".  That's possible, as well as the other category which is "New revenues from people who are not broadcasting", using, I guess with television or on radio.  We'll be generating some revenue from that category as well.

 

2363    And of course there'll be some revenues generated in, you know, the specialty television services, and there would definitely be some new revenues.  Sorry.  I covered that.  And there'll be some revenues from existing off-air television services.

 

2364    So, we're saying that it would be a combination balance in terms of where all these multilingual/ethnic revenues are coming from.

 

2365    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  How did you get to these percentages?

 

2366    MR. MOY:  Well, I guess the first thing was that we -- by living here and being close to the market, we understood what was available in terms of revenue share.

 

2367    In addition to that, of course we did substantial market research.  So a market research performed by Grapheme Koo where they talked to the non-ethnic advertiser.  Again, these advertisers were not spending any money, or minimal money on the ethnic advertisement.  And then once we described the concept to them, you know they got interested, and from -- I think, 10, 20 percent of original interest.  Once we described the concept to them, that number jumped up to - correct me if I'm wrong - somewhere about 70 percent or so.

 

2368    So that leads us to believe that there's new revenues out there.  In addition to that, there are lots of advertisers that are not able to afford the advertisement dollars that are being charged by the conventional TV stations in Vancouver.  Because from my last discussions with an advertiser three weeks ago or so, one of the new shows in Vancouver was asking for, I think $800 a point.

 

2369    So we're going to be providing alternatives to a lot of the advertisers that have smaller budgets.  And I guess if you look at our schedule 13, our numbers are very conservative.  We are charging say, one point, at say $300 a point.  And that is during the 6:00 to 8:00 time frame, and that is the same time frame which we plan to repatriate some business from, say, KVOS.

 

2370    So, I guess in combination of the research, our knowledge of the local business, because all the shareholders here have spent their lives here, so they understand the market.  And in addition to that, just an understanding of the television market itself, where Doug Holtby, of course, has tremendous experience. 

 

2371    We talked to advertisers, agencies, as well.  And we have knowledge through the radio station as to, perhaps the behaviour of consumers, as well as the spending power of the advertisers.

 

2372    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And that led you to break down the --

 

2373    MR. MOY:  That led us to --

 

2374    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- existing off-air, 26 percent, existing specialty, 17 percent.

 

2375    MR. MOY:  That's correct.

 

2376    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  When you say that 26 percent of your revenues would come from existing off-air, which off-air stations do you see being affected by that.

 

2377    MR. MOY:  We anticipate that part of that 26 percent will be repatriation of revenues seq level0 \h \r0 seq level1 \h \r0 seq level2 \h \r0 seq level3 \h \r0 seq level4 \h \r0 seq level5 \h \r0 seq level6 \h \r0 seq level7 \h \r0 from U.S. broadcasters, such as say, KVOS, or I guess the other U.S. broadcaster could be Fox.  So 26 percent say, our first year of revenues is approximately four and a half million dollars.

 

2378    So it's possible that half of those revenues could be repatriated from the U.S. stations.  I know there's a number kind of floating around that maybe it should be $5,000,000.  I think that was discussed one or two years ago, I believe two years ago.  And now we have to factor in the fact that CHUM has just launched their Victoria station.  Although they are targeting the Victoria market, there's still possibilities that there could be some repatriation there.

 

2379    So $5,000,000 is maybe optimistic.  So we reduce that to, you know, probably it could be $4,000,000 available.  So now, we're being conservative by saying that, okay.  Perhaps $2,000,000 to two and a half million dollars of this 4.4 would be repatriated revenues from the U.S. broadcasters.

 

2380    So now, it leaves approximately say two to two and a half million dollars from the existing conventional T.V. broadcasters who are providing a service to the Vancouver market now.

 

2381    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And which specialty channels do you think you'd have the biggest impact on?

 

2382    MR. MOY:  The biggest impact?  I guess the response to that would be a combination of impact to various specialty television services of stations providing service to the Vancouver market.

 

2383    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Such as?

 

2384    MR. MOY:  I believe it could be where there's a variety of specialty channels.  So I would say --

 

2385    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I'm familiar with all of them.  You could --

 

2386    MR. MOY:  Fairchild.

 

2387    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- give me a couple of names.

 

2388    MR. HO:  I think -- let me just mention a couple names.  Of course there will be Fairchild Television being one of the group.  There'll be NHK, HTTV, AT and Odyssey, SATV, A & E, just to name a variety of these specialty TV.  We do believe that, you know, all of the specialty TV will be affected in a way, but in a very spectacular way or not, this is somewhere we have -- again, like I say, building our programming to try to be complementing instead of taking those markets away.

 

2389    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mm-hmm.

 

2390    MR. HO:  And some of the market, like I say, NHK, AT and Odyssey, Fairchild, and a lot of these programs -- well, are foreign imported program, and in there are national programs that's mainly geared to work from one source, and there's very little coverage of Vancouver market on the first place.

 

2391    So again, that 17 percent is conservatively estimated on the high side, and we do not want an overly optimistic figure to be presented here to provide the commissioner with the false idea as though that we will have no impact at all, which is not true.

 

2392    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That number --

 

2393    MR. HO:  There will be some impact.

 

2394    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  It's quite similar to the number that Rogers used the last time they filed for a multilingual station in this market, but they've since reduced that to three percent, based on information that they gathered, I guess, in putting their application together, so you don't think 17 percent is out of whack?

 

2395    MR. HO:  Well, I do not think that 17 percent's out of whack, but of course like I say, we have been always on the conservative side, on the high side, and like I say our programming is geared towards to have minimal impact on any of these stations here. 

 

2396    Phillip, if you have anything to add?  By the way, can I just quickly comment on the U.S. situation, the KVOS and --

 

2397    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mm-hmm.

 

2398    MR. HO:  -- I don't quite remember.  One of your commissioners asked the question about KCBC.  Being a local owner of ethnic broadcaster we have been paying very, very close attention to KCBC.  I mean, we are here.  We're being owner here.  We're being affected by them.  That's why I pay very close attention to them.  They're on air by the way.  They've been on air for a while, and they've been broadcasting for a while, and they've been broadcasting multicultural stations for a while.

 

2399    About a year ago, they'd been hiring people from Vancouver down in Bellingham.  They have not been that successful in hiring people from Vancouver.  However, what happened here is they have applied for a signal so strong that's going to feed into the market over here.  However, when they did with FCC, FCC handed the application over to Industry Canada, and for information, Industry Canada denied their application so they cannot broadcast into this part of the country.

 

2400    So what they have done is they have run into the cable system, and been broadcasting their programs into Seattle.  A lot of their programs are foreign imported programs.  They have business associates that they're working with down the State, and a lot of their program, again, like I say is Chinese origin, in the Mandarin community.

 

2401    And as a matter of fact, when we applied for this program, I called KVOS as well as KCBC, and very frankly explained to them who I am and what I'm doing.  Not much result from KVOS because they know we're going to be competing with them. 

 

2402    What surprised me a lot is KCBC.  The general manager, Shelley, immediately returned my phone call, and had about an hour chat over the phone with me, and I don't know whether she's in the hearing or not, but she did say that she wanted to come up and hear us, and want to see us because they're looking for program sources in the Chinese origin, and they're extremely interested in sourcing our program being a local program as well.

 

2403    But overall speaking, we did not put any of that projection in any of our revenue source either, you know.  But they did find an interest to try to source another source of programming, especially they were saying in the local Vancouver market, they are very, very interested in airing it.  If we have that program, they would like to work out some sort of deal with us.

 

2404    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.

 

2405    MR. HO:  It's just in discussion, but we didn't have any further deals to be talked about, but --

 

2406    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Well, that's contrary to what we heard yesterday, which was that they were waiting to launch to see whether or not there was --

 

2407    MR. HO:  They are here.  They are here.  I'm sure of that because --

 

2408    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  They've launched.

 

2409    MR. HO:  -- I talked to them, and they are launched, but they got turned down to increase the power.

 

2410    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  For the power increase.

 

2411    MR. HO:  That's right.  So they gave up.  They said they do not want to -- because they will never get that from Industry Canada.  But what they done instead of that, I think we turn that around.  I think they're also a potential source of market for us to export our programs too.

 

2412    Just to let you know what -- being a local owner that's why we really care about it.

 

2413    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  Now, I asked you earlier if you could identify what proportion of each of these is ethnic advertising.  Can you give me actual proportions?  Like, of the 26 percent can you give me a break up between what's English language and what's multilingual?  Advertising revenues?

 

2414    MR. HOLTBY:  Are you referring to the existing off-air?  I don't --

 

2415    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I'm referring to all of the categories you've identified.

 

2416    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, in the case of existing off-air, I don't think there'd be any ethnic.  I can't imagine advertisers advertising on conventional television to reach an ethnic audience.  So I really don't think it would be significant there.

 

2417    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay. 

 

2418    MR. HOLTBY:  In the case of radio, I think James would hope that it would be all conventional radio stations, but I would think that there would be some impact on ethnic radio stations.

 

2419    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  He can offer a package now --

 

2420    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  It's --

 

2421    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  -- for the two properties.

 

2422    MR. HOLTBY:  You know it's very difficult.  I mean our revenue is basically 70/30, I guess or 75/25.  I think in the case of new revenues that a larger percentage, not the larger gross amount, but a larger percentage of the ethnic pie or the ethnic gross dollars would come in that category, because that's going to be one of the opportunities we see is getting new advertisers that are currently not advertising on television.

 

2423    As far as new revenues advertisers I should -- I gave you the wrong percentage.  I gave you 30 percent and it should be 24.

 

2424    In the case of increased advertising the 30 percent, that would relate of course, pretty well all to the conventional --

 

2425    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  National sales.

 

2426    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, national English speaking.

 

2427    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Right.

 

2428    MR. HOLTBY:  Right.

 

2429    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So it would primarily be in advertisers not currently using radio or television and specialty that you'd find the multilingual.

 

2430    MR. HOLTBY:  And yes, and there would be some from the radio.  James will do his best to --

 

2431    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  A small amount.

 

2432    MR. HOLTBY:  -- make that -- yes.  It's not much.

 

2433    MR. HO:  Well, whatever's affected on the radio side, as I say, taking away a portion of the three percent, I think it's going to be more than make up from the increases of the new business.

 

2434    You know, combining the two together would be 54 percent.  I mean even if we just get one percent of that, I'll be very happy, because I do not think that three percent is a total of, you know, three percent affecting us, a very small portion of that.

 

2435    MR. MOY:  I'd just like to add to that.  What Doug has mentioned that, mostly I think revenues are going to be sitting in the categories, those two categories, whereby they're new revenues.  We have a couple pieces of market research information that supports this claim I guess.

 

2436    And one thing is with the Ipsos Reid study.  With the Ipsos Reid study, for example for the Chinese population, I think I can be clarified again, but roughly 40 to 50 percent of the Chinese population are believing that there is greater need, more inventory, more shows or programs that they would like to watch because they are underserved. 

 

2437    And if you, for example, take the Chinese population of 300,000 people and just multiply by half, 150,000 of the Chinese people are not served by the existing specialty television station.

 

2438    And they combine that point with I believe it's the Grapheme Koo study.  A lot of advertisers, they're ethnic or non-ethnic, I guess in this case actually it's ethnic, where they're saying that they're trying to get into a certain time slot of Fairchild.  But for whatever reason, either that say prime time is either sold out or they are forced, I don't want to use the word forced, they are limited as to where they can place their advertisement.  Because for example during the RSP season, there may be three, four banks that may want to advertise prime time on Fairchild.

 

2439    And theoretically, you know, T-D Bank wouldn't want to advertise right after Royal Bank.  So then they are limited as to how they can spend the money, and those are the kind of advertisers that would say spend their budget on our television station --

 

2440    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Mm-hmm.

 

2441    MR. MOY:  -- whereby Fairchild's already sold out.  They're looking for additional inventory and they come to our station and spend their new dollars.  So I just wanted to add those two points.

 

2442    MR. SHATTENBERG:  Phillip, if I could amplify some of your comments of the -- market research does point out that asking people what effect the proposed station would have on their viewing habits?  While 43 percent said that they would reallocate their viewing hours, almost the same proportion, 42 percent said that they would continue to watch their current channels, but they would find extra time to watch the new television station.  Which suggests that the appeal of the concept is so strong that people would find time in the day to watch more television so that the effect would be to really increase the audience and bring more people there.

 

2443    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Thank you for that.  Schedule 13, Mr. Moy, you can probably answer this one.  You've given us detailed calculations for the English sales by time period.  Where are the calculations for your multilingual programming?

 

2444    MR. MOY:  They are nowhere to be found in the application, but --

 

2445    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That's for sure.

 

2446    MR. MOY:  -- good thing it's in my head.

 

2447    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  They're in your head?

 

2448    MR. MOY:  Yes.

 

2449    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Are we going to be here all afternoon?  There are seven pages, eight and a half to 14.

 

2450    MR. MOY:  I do have a calculator here, but for example, with year one revenues, we estimate that there would be $3,145,000, and what I'm calling now again multilingual revenue versus ethnic revenue.

 

2451    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Right.

 

2452    MR. MOY:  And the breakdown for that revenue figure is --

 

2453    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Do you actually have this on paper?

 

2454    MR. MOY:  Yes, I do.

 

2455    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  You do?

 

2456    MR. MOY:  Yes.

 

2457    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Would we like that?

 

2458    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  I think it might be simpler if you could perhaps file that document with us by the end of the day today, if you --

 

2459    MR. MOY:  Sure.

 

2460    MR. PINSKY:  -- have it with you.

 

2461    MR. MOY:  That way I don't have to explain it.

 

2462    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That's right.

 

2463    MR. MOY:  Thank you.

 

2464    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And I'm sure your colleagues will be very appreciative.  All right.

 

2465    MR. KANE:  Excuse me for a moment.  We have a marked up copy in front of us, and it may be first thing tomorrow morning, if that's acceptable.

 

2466    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The lawyer is nodding.

 

2467    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  We'll need some extra copies, please.

 

2468    MR. KANE:  Thank you.  I will do that.

 

2469    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  All right.  Synergies with CHMB, you talked a little bit this morning about synergies that you can find through on the programming side.  What about operational synergies for MBBC?

 

2470    MR. HO:  Okay.  Can you be a little bit more specific about operation?  In that do you mean --

 

2471    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Well, you're going to build your own new facility.  You've, you know, discussed that in the application, but will CHMB be able to provide any services to MBBC?

 

2472    MR. HO:  Oh, yes, a tremendous amount of service.  First of all the ethnic side of the operation is our specialty, and that's where --

 

2473    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The sales.

 

2474    MR. HO:  Not only the sales, but also programming as well at the same time, because again to broaden the market, there are certain limited hour.  There's actually limited hour on both stations at this moment on certain third languages.

 

2475    And this is the opportunity for number one, a station naturally will -- we will be able to do a certain amount of cross-promotion.  Certain events and certain organization will be cross-organized as well.  I mean there are certain things that TV can organize that we can participate -- there are certain things that we can organize together with TV that we both are going to be participating. 

 

2476    On top of it, on the news side, you know news again is the key in this situation.  We have a very established and operating news crew of 12 people at this moment.  Yes, 12 people with our stand alone radio station here.  A lot of these people, again, like I say, would be able to cross over into the TV, providing TV with lots of information, lots of update, and advising the situation as we go along.

 

2477    Because radio is very quick, very fast in terms of response.  Television is also quick nowadays with its equipment.  Microwave broadcast, et cetera, that can beam back to the station. 

 

2478    And you talk about the sales force, sales force for a certain area, I think there would be certain synergies.  But combining the sales force together, it's going to be a little bit difficult in terms of technical side, but in terms of ethnic sales, I think the two can complement each other.

 

2479    We will be doing a lot of radio sales and radio sales is very different from television.  Radio you have to do a lot more in depth, sales in that, and we have a track record.  We know what's happening.  Whereas television is strictly on the points.  There will be certain synergies in terms of sales result.

 

2480    You know, one very quick example I can provide to you is we did sales for Richmond Acura located in the lower mainland.  They had a whole bunch of year end 2001 Integra they wanted to sell.  So they asked us to do a, you know, promotion, one week promotion, just us.  And we suggested, well we need newspaper as well in this situation to help because we like to, you know, bring the newspaper in.  But between us and newspaper, where we did most of the strategy and sales, between Saturday and Monday, about a month ago, they sold all of their inventory, 42 Integras in one weekend, and a lot of these spilled over to Burrard Acura.

 

2481    So now Burrard Acura suddenly came to us and they say, "We want to advertise with you now too."  We didn't even go to them this year.  But you know, it's just a spill over type of thing. 

 

2482    I mean, we've been hearing a lot of things in the community that we will be able to provide to the television, and I'm sure television, there's a lot of things they'll be hearing.

 

2483    For instance, let's say television approached a certain client.  The client will say, "I would like to advertise with you, but I only have $20,000.  What do you want me to do?"  Then they may say, "Well, refer to us and we can do something about it."  Then while we can go to somebody - it could be Mr. Segal here - he says, "I want to spend $300,000."  I say, "Whoa.  That's great."  So I'll take some and here's a radio station.

 

2484    So there's a lot of synergy in that situation.  And community events and special events.  You know, the community event, et cetera, fund raising and special event fund raising we have done -- I'm sorry.  Just let's stay with some of the special events and community events, Carnival Brazil 2001 with karaoke contest, where we'll be talking to all these different so-called local talent.  We did a Rotary Club community kids watching identification program, in conjunction with Crime Stoppers, Vancouver City Police and Chinese Cultural Centre, which turned out to be a great success.  You know what's missing there, television.  TV is missing and the perfect opportunity for the TV station to go there to do the filming.

 

2485    RCMP Open House, we did that again.  It was a total chaotic situation, because instead of 300 people we were expecting to turn out, we had 3,000 people turn out.  So it was a situation where we can show to this community what's really happening to this community.  What can the media do, not just from the radio side, but on the TV side as well.  I think there's a definite cross-synergy.

 

2486    Charitable and fund-raising event has been our specialty for the last 20 some years.  We constantly raise money for them.  Just last year on a soccer tournament that we have done, we raised $40,000 almost for B.C. Children's Hospital.  That's over one week of soccer tournament in the Chinese community.  Again, what's missing?  TV, we don't have TV there.

 

2487    Variety Club on the annual 2000 telethon, we raised -- CHMB raised about 65,000 for them last year.  Lion's Club, B.C. Cancer Foundation, Red Cross.

 

2488    And 1999, when we had the biggest earthquake in Taiwan, we orchestrated the fund raising efforts with all the -- you know we were in charge of all the media side, and we did it with Tzu Chi Foundation which, by the way, you probably did not know this is a Buddhist Foundation, charitable organization in Vancouver. 

 

2489    They've been here for about five years, and every year, they themselves donate $1,000,000 into this community, okay, and they do not charge anything overhead.  It's $1 in, $1 out.  So all my donation actually goes to them, even though I'm not a Buddhist myself, but I see the result.

 

2490    seq level0 \h \r0 seq level1 \h \r0 seq level2 \h \r0 seq level3 \h \r0 seq level4 \h \r0 seq level5 \h \r0 seq level6 \h \r0 seq level7 \h \r0 COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Just to repeat for the benefit of the court reporter.  I'll start with a couple of technical questions and then go back to a couple of issues that you discussed earlier, just to get some clarification.

 

2491    Did you, when you were looking at what channel you were going to apply for, did you look at any other channels besides channel 42C?

 

2492    MR. HO:  I would like to refer this question to our engineer consultant, Mr. Glen McCormick.

 

2493    MR. McCORMICK:          No, we only looked at the one channel.  This is the one class C channel available in Vancouver.

 

2494    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And we asked the application yesterday this question and got two different answers.  One of which was definitive.  If, for any reason, channel 42C were not available, would you be willing to use another channel for your proposed station?

 

2495    MR. McCORMICK:  We could certainly design a television transmitting plant to serve Vancouver with another channel.  The other channel allotments for Vancouver are class A and B channels and they would have a lower power rating.

 

2496    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, and Mr. Holtby, is that a good answer for you?

 

2497    MR. HOLTBY:  That's a good answer for me.

 

2498    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  One of the things that we often consider when we're looking at a competitive situation is the best use of the channel or in the case of radio, the frequency. Why would you think that your proposal is a better use than the LMtv application?

 

2499    MR. HOLTBY:  I think we'd like our consultant to talk to that.  He has some thoughts on the other proposal.

 

2500    MR. McCORMICK:  The channel we have used, channel 42C has been designed, transmitting facilities have been designed to serve the Greater Vancouver, Lower Fraser Valley.  Essentially our prime coverage contour, grade A service contour, as you can note in your coverage map, extends south of the Canada/US border and extends eastward up into the Abbotsford area.  We believe this is a good use of this channel for this area.

 

2501    MR. HOLTBY:  Madam Chair, as I understand it, the other application is proposing a significantly more powerful transmitter and we understand from what they said yesterday it would reach Victoria.  Mr. McCormick showed me yesterday, maybe he can enlighten the Commission that in fact it does not reach Victoria, it just falls off in the strait.  Perhaps you could fill them in.

 

2502    MR. McCORMICK:  The grade B service contour is filed by Rogers shows that coverage, the grade B contour extends just north of Victoria, which would be normally the limit of service, but they also show an interference zone on that contour.  In fact, the whole Saanich peninsula is not included in their coverage.

 

2503    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So you would agree that even though the grade B contour itself goes to the northern part of Victoria, because of that area of interference that it does not actually reach, it has to actually reach Victoria in order to be considered overlapping with that territory?

 

2504    MR. McCORMICK:  Normally to serve an urban area, you would want to get the grade A coverage contour around the area.  We're talking about the grade B contour which is normally considered the limited coverage and service to a rural area.

 

2505    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I think their argument was, though, that if their grade B contour overlaps the territory of the cable system in Victoria then they would get carriage on the cable system.

 

2506    MR. McCORMICK:  I believe that was their argument, yes.

 

2507    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And you wouldn't agree with that?      

 

2508    MR. McCORMICK:   I have no comment on that at this time.

 

2509    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Oh, okay.

 

2510    MR. McCORMICK:  I'm not clear on just -- we have not negotiated for cable service, to the best of my knowledge, in that market.  Certainly it's technical possibly with other facilities.

 

2511    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2512    MR. HOLTBY:  Okay, I guess what our plan contemplated was a better use of the frequency would be to have a re-broadcast, re-broadcaster in Victoria, as opposed to a, I guess, an impaired B contour reaching part of Victoria.  So that's how we faced our plan with this application.

 

2513    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And, what's your understanding of what your status would be with a transmitter, a re-broad in Victoria?  What kind of access would you expect on the cable system there?

 

2514    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, if received the Commission's approval to put a re-broadcaster and which we haven't applied for at the time, but if we got your permission, then it would have a priority carriage in Victoria.  And I would assume there would be certain conditions of license because it was a re-broadcaster and not a locally originating station as far as local advertisements and those kinds of things, but it would have priority carriage in Victoria, I'm sure.

 

2515    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  But you felt it was better to keep your power lower for the Vancouver area?

 

2516    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, after hearing what the Rogers consultant said yesterday, I wonder why we didn't do the same thing.

 

2517    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I wondered the same thing.

 

2518    MR. HOLTBY:  I asked the question last night and we were told that it, that a more proper way of servicing Victoria would be to put in a re-broadcaster in Victoria so that those who aren't on cable would be able to get a good signal.

 

2519    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  I want to go back to the discussion that you had about the use of independent producers to produce a chunk of the programming in your schedule.  I believe you said that the Yoga, Tai Chi, Table by the Exit and Sounds Right Tonight would all be independent.  And those would be produced by independent producers who are like the conventionally independent producer, they'd hold the rights and --

 

2520    MR. HOLTBY:  In response to a deficiency, we gave those as examples of shows that could be and probably would be independently produced, that's correct.

 

2521    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  I guess my real question and this sort of goes back to the business plan and the viability of your plan, your programming plan.  You're planning on using independent producers, albeit you defined it slightly differently for the Lifestyles programming as well?

 

2522    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.

 

2523    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And you would pay all of the costs for that programming because it probably has no export potential?

 

2524    MR. HOLTBY:  That's correct.

 

2525    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And those producers don't work for you.  I believe you said that some of them even have full-time jobs and that they're doing this on the side as a, you know, another pursuit, something that they do because they feel passionate about it or --

 

2526    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  Some of these ethnic producers, they wouldn't look upon producing one hour a week as a full-time job and some would, I mean, it will vary.  It will be very much dependent on the show.

 

2527    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So would you also pay them for that one hour a week?

 

2528    MR. HOLTBY:  Oh, absolutely.

 

2529    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So you would.  Do you have any concern about, because there are quite a few hours that I counted here and I don't actually identify the repeats and where you say Filipino Lifestyles 2, Korean Lifestyles 2, are those repeats?

 

2530    MR. HOLTBY:  Both shows when they say 2 are the same show and one would be the original, one would be a repeat.  There's Filipino Lifestyles and a Filipino repeat.

 

2531    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, so how many hours per week of Lifestyle programming do you have?      

 

2532    MR. HOLTBY:  Perhaps Phillip can help out, we didn't break it out like that.  We have 42 and a half hours of original local and 17 and a half hour of repeat.

 

2533    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Of repeat.

 

2534    MR. HOLTBY:  But Phillip can probably --

 

2535    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes, and 14 of that, 14 of the original is news, I believe.

 

2536    MR. HOLTBY:  It's 14 of the repeat?

 

2537    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  News.  Original.

 

2538    MR. HOLTBY:  Actually it's 28 hours of news would be original.

 

2539    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Twenty-eight hours of original news, okay.

 

2540    MR. HOLTBY:  But, Phillip, perhaps you can help.

 

2541    MR. HO:  Let me just say the news in the evening of Chinese news and the South-Asian news will be broadcasted with a daily update and then overnight we will have another updated, which is going to be broadcasted in the morning.  The two will have certain portions, that's going to be repeated.  So, we're going to have updates and new report as to what happened.  Like the evening news will be the day, a lot of local news and the morning will be quite a bit of international and national news with a certain amounts of repeats on the local news from the previous evening.  So there is two different type of, it's not just strictly that we're broadcasting one and then --

 

2542    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So it's not a straight repeat.

 

2543    MR. HO:  It's not a straight repeat.

 

2544    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, so that's why you consider it 28 hours of original local.

 

2545    MR. HO:  That's right because both are going to be updated throughout the 24 hours.  It's not going to be a situation where we're not going to be updating it.  And Phillip, did you have anything you want to add?

 

2546    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.

 

2547    MR. MOY:  I believe your question was how many hours of Lifestyle are we going to be providing.  In total, it's going to be 26 hours, in total.

 

2548    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And how many original?

 

2549    MR. MOY:  And in terms of originals, it will be, it will be 15.  Fifteen hours of original Lifestyle programming.

 

2550    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay, so I guess my question is do you have any concern about the idea that 15 hours of original programming each and every week of the year is going to be produced by people who might have other full-time jobs and are doing this on the side?

 

2551    MR. HOLTBY:  No, I don't have any concerns about that at all.  We are going to get this, we talked about this earlier, proposals from each one of these communities.  And we will be, along with the guidance of the community itself and our advisory council making a determination of which show to put on the air.  I can tell the Commission and you'll hear it from some of our interveners.  It think they want to produce some programmes for their community but they have other things that they do and there will be some instances where it'll be a full-time job. 

 

2552    It's very difficult until you see the concept, until you see the actually production in place, to know how much time it will take to be a producer.  We will have producers on board, experienced producers, staff producers that will handle a lot of the associate producer functions.  What we're talking about is the producer, the creative force behind the project.  As I said earlier, I can't see staffing up a television station with 22 languages and 22 ethnic groups it just doesn't, it's not going to work.  But we will provide support for each one of these producers but we need them for the creative elements that they will come forward with.

 

2553    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So, in addition to the in house producers that you have who work on news, you'll have other producers who work with the various communities, in terms of making sure that those programmes get produced and go to air each week.

 

2554    MR. HOLTBY:  Well the title, I'm not sure if we would call them producers.  In a production, as the Commission well knows, it's not just a producer that does everything.  You have associate producers, line producers and so there is support staff that lines up all the elements to make sure when the producer comes with the creative elements that the other elements, the production elements are all in place.  There has to be a co-ordination between the independent producer and the television operation.  That have crews available, sets built and set up and lighting and audio and all of that will be handled internally.  That would be part of the responsibility of the television station.

 

2555    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So that's part of the service then, support and co-operation.

 

2556    MR. HOLTBY:  Well no.  I mean, independent producers coming into a television station, if they all could grab onto equipment and facilities at will, I mean you'd have chaos.  I mean, you have to have some order and you have to have scheduled times for production so the crews know where to go and what's to set up before.  There's so much pre-production that has to happen before you actually go to tape.  And going to tape is that last -- or live -- it's the last thing you do.  It's really, to a large extent that's the easy part of a production.  It's the idea, developing the idea and then the pre-production leading up to the production.

 

2557    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The only programming I really worked in was unedited programming so that was a lot easier.  You just point the camera and away you go.

 

2558    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, actually, I think that live is the toughest television to do.  I can recall when we were doing SCTV in Edmonton that the director taking a shot and doing it 15 times and I would say, why are you doing it 15 times, you know a particular shot of Dave Thomas and Rick Moranis.  Oh, I'm not sure I got it right.  You know and then he would have, they really built the show in post-production as opposed to doing it live and I think live television is the best television and probably the hardest to do.

 

2559    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Warts and all.  Okay just two more short questions.  One for Mr. Segal.  I just can't resist since you made that peanuts comment, it's all I can think about.  Would you like to increase the amount of that scholarship?  Yesterday my colleague Commissioner Cardozo was asking, "Was that $1 million over seven years or a $1 million a year?"  I'm just teasing.

 

2560    MR. SEGAL:  I know.  But the comment, frankly, was figurative, not literal.

 

2561    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And again, Commissioner Cardozo likes to give his editorial comments on the videos, I wanted to ask about one of your program titles.  I wanted to know why the table is by the exit.  If it's because if you don't like what you see, you can sneak out the door.

 

2562    MR. HO:  That's exactly the idea.  If you don't like it, just shut it off or just leave, we don't notice the table by the exit.

 

2563    COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Thank you very much.  Those are all my questions.  Madam Chair?

 

2564    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Commissioner Wilson.  Commissioner Grauer?

 

2565    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Since I have you here Mr. Ho, I would like to ask you a question.  One of the issues that I've struggled with since being appointed has been to be, you know, a champion for, certainly for, British Columbia, for the whole issue of whether it's local ownership or the participation and involvement of the local independent production community here. 

 

2566    And one of the responses, and I must say, my colleagues probably have heard more than they ever wanted to hear about local, local, local, but one of the comments that I have heard from people has been that Vancouver, the reason Vancouver doesn't have a strong indigenous independent production community, and by that I mean one that has developed its really creative talents, writing talents, we don't have Alliance Atlantis here, we don't have the Salter Street and even in many respects, not as strong as in Edmonton, has been, and people have speculated and that's why I'd like to know from you, is that, in fact, WIC in all those years, while it had very strong news and very popular news didn't develop relationships with local producers in building an independent production community.

 

2567    And I'm curious to hear your response to it because the aspect of local programming, I think, is always important, whether it's, and locally originated programming and local voices, not just for the ethnic communities, but also for the, you know, white English community.  Because we experience Canada differently here than people do in Ontario or people do in the Maritimes, I mean, we are different, as we know and as they know. 

 

2568    So all this is really a way of saying that local ownership is important.  I think local programming and local creation of that programming is important but there are other elements, perhaps as there is a responsibility of being a local broadcaster.  I'd like your sense of sort of the contribution to the whole.  It isn't just responsive programming and local ownership, so you have local shareholders that, in fact, take their profits and put it back into the community.  But it's really that, the contribution of that programming enterprise, that ownership to the broadcasting system as a whole.  So, I wonder if you could --

 

2569    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I'm glad you asked that question.  But to respond, I'm going to have to go back a little bit in the history.  As the Commission knows, I started out my career in Edmonton in '74 and I left there in 1989 and I joined WIC in '89.  And it was about two years after that -- and during that period, '74 to '89 we built, I think, Western Canada's biggest production facility or most, most up to date anyway, facility in Edmonton and we were very lucky and successful in some of our productions and movies that we had invested in.  And through our ownership of, not only the television station but the pay company, we had a mandate to do, to invest and help Western Canadian.  Because we became a western pay company, we had a commitment to do western movies, and we did that. 

 

2570    In 1991, we, Dr. Allard phoned and said, I'd like to put, I'd like to sell or merge the two companies, is really what he was looking at it.  He thought that it was very important for Canada and the system that there be a strong western based broadcast company.  And our owner at that time, Frank Griffiths, felt exactly the same way.  And so there was -- and by the way, Dr. Allard said, if I can't sell it to WIC, if I can't put it together with WIC, I won't sell it to anybody.  He wasn't looking to get out of the business and he really believed that.  Frankly, he could have got, I think, a lot more money if he'd put it on the block.  He had some very significant assets but he really believed that this was very important for Western Canada so he put those two companies together.

 

2571    One of the commitments that we made to the Commission was that we would keep a creative office in Edmonton and what Edmonton was doing at that time with the pay company and the television station would continue and we wouldn't strip it out and bring it to head office and we also created a creative development office here in Vancouver. But our mandate at that time was, obviously, we would do production in Vancouver but it wasn't exclusively in Vancouver.  In fact, we did some projects with Salter Films, you know, in the Maritimes.  I mean, WIC grew, WIC acquired Hamilton, so we had a real national perspective.  So we were doing those kinds of things.

 

2572    I think that WIC did a tremendous job in developing, in helping with the production industry.  You're well aware that this is a very vibrant industry here and, to some extent, it's a very difficult one for indigenous producers to, you know, get their projects going because there's so much demand on crews.  I can remember back in '76 there may have been two crews available in all of Vancouver.  Well, there's probably today 25 working.  But I'm going to learn more about it because I've just agreed, just been asked to join, Lion's Gate Films board of directors and I have my first board meeting November 3^rd.  So, I'll get a little bit more knowledgeable about what they're doing.  But they have North Shore Studios, the biggest facility in British Columbia and involved in film production and television production.

 

2573    So I think WIC did a very good job.  You're absolutely right, their claim to fame was news.  They did a terrific job and they still do and I hope it doesn't change under the new ownership. 

 

2574    And BCTV and if we go back a little bit in history, was quite constrained in what they could do because they were a CTV affiliate.  And they did some game shows out of here and this is before my time.  But I think when you look at what we did going back and have to dust off some cobwebs, but we were investing in excess of $20, 30 million dollars a year outside of license fees, but seed money, investment money in projects.  Not all of them in Vancouver, there's some in Alberta, there's some in Winnipeg, I remember we did some project there, projects we did in Winnipeg, and the Maritimes and, of course, Toronto.

 

2575    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Well, thank you for that, I just, as I say, I mean, one of the things that is, I think, sad in a way is that we ended up doing mostly service production and I think that the industry -- unlike Toronto which, I think, has a good business with Canadian television networks and Salter Street and, as you say, even in Edmonton where you have some specialties and we have kind of ended up in a situation here which has, you know, certainly is challenging to me because, what happens if the service kind of, as we're starting to hear, may go back?

 

2576    MR. HOLTBY:  I think it's very sad what's happened and I think what the outlook will be.  I'm concerned as a British Columbian.  We did our best and we never got to the size, the level that a Global is or CTV Baton was.  I mean, that was in the works when I was there we were trying to extend our influence across the country and we had stations in British Columbia and Alberta and then we had a very difficult situation in Hamilton, CHCH and that was growing and that was moving forward. 

 

2577    I'm very disappointed by what has transpired because all of the decision now on television production, conventional television, are made in Toronto.  I mean that's a fact.  I can tell you when WIC was alive and well, there was decisions made in Vancouver and to a lesser extent in Edmonton but they had a creative development office there.  All of the decisions are made in Toronto and the reality is that if you're not on the doorstep and known by the decision makers you're going to have a difficult time.

 

2578    So that the western producers the outlook, in my mind, is not good for them.  And I think it's sad.  Maybe WIC could have done more, I don't know, but it, I think it's sad.  And all of them, the entire system, what Dr. Allard and Frank Griffiths had envisioned that they thought it was important for balance in the system that there be a strong Western based broadcaster, there isn't one now.  They're all, decisions are out of Toronto and it doesn't bode well for the production community here.

 

2579    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  And I notice that in your application, that you have chosen not to, really not to address that.  That you're really focussing on the local programming, that which doesn't have really much of a shelf life beyond.  That you have chosen not to have a go at that, trying to develop an indigenous --

 

2580    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, this is one small step, I hope, in a long journey.  I mean, we're talking about a local ethnic station and I've got great partners and, and maybe there's some other opportunities that are going to arise that we can do some more things.  We get along well and there's resources and I think, frankly, some of them have had a great time here at this hearing and they may want to do it again.

 

2581    The one thing we know for sure is that five or 10  years from now the ownership is going to change.  Nobody could have convinced me 10  years ago that WIC would no longer be a force in Canadian broadcasting.  I wouldn't have believed it for a moment 10  years ago.  Even, I guess six years ago.  But that's happened.  That's happened with Selkirk; it's happened with a number of other big companies and it will happen again and it's  -- Global may disappear someday.  Izzy Asper started in 1975 with a part ownership of an independent in Winnipeg and he's grown, he's got quite an empire now and one thing we know for sure, it will change over the next five or 10  years.

 

2582    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  One other little piece, I know that we're getting late in the day.  It has been my experience, god knows I've had some colleagues who've been here longer and you've been around the business a long time, but normally licensees don't do much more than meet the commitments and, which is why we're in a competitive situation, we really want to hear what are people's plans.  In this model where you have 40 percent of your programming which is the, essentially US programming, would be generating 80 percent of your revenues, there's not much incentive, if you're a business person and these are very shrewd business people, I know, to invest more than is required.  For instance, to do some of the programming that, you know, we talked about in terms of cross-cultural or some of these things which are not likely to be revenue generators. 

 

2583    So, how are you, how have you looked at that kind of programming?  I know you've talked a lot about it, but really, what is the incentive for you going to be to do that kind of programming which is probably not going to be profitable.  It's not where you're going to make your money.  Are you not going to be incented to do the lowest cost programming, certainly meet your commitments that you've made to us, but can you --

 

2584    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, Commissioner Grauer, that's not good business to do that, just what you're talking about and if we look at the stations that I've been involved in, we didn't have conditions of license that were specific on spending for the news for example.  BCTV news, what they spend on news is probably nobody spends it in Canada as much as they do.

 

2585    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Nobody probably makes what they make in news either.

 

2586    MR. HOLTBY:  Precisely.  That's my point is that they because they deliver in gross -- at one time, I don't if it's the case today -- but at one time there was only two other news casts that got greater numbers, not percentages, in North America.  One was Philadelphia and one was New York. So there's two stations -- and this is a market of what, two and a half million people at the time -- so, that just proves my point.  You do it right, you deliver quality, people will watch.  And the future for ethnic television is not going out and buying some more strip for American product.  I mean, what kind of business is that?  I mean, that's, you've got a finite level. 

 

2587    The way to really reach the full potential for ethnic broadcasting is to deliver quality ethnic programming that people will watch, that you can then sell, and get a return on.  In our case, 68 percent of our inventory is sitting there, it cost us money, we're going to make that work for us. 

 

2588    When you're in  broadcasting, as the Commission well knows, you have to do things that are not necessarily economic. I can recall extensive discussions at the CTV board over the requirements that we had to cover national elections at a time when CTV was losing money.  It meant that each shareholder was going to be writing a half a million dollar cheque to allow CTV, give them the resources, to cover a national election.  You have to do that.  It's not a business decision; it's a broadcast decision.  There was no choice.  They were painful for choices, but there was no dissention.  The board just, you know, we have to do it, and we signed the cheques. 

 

2589    So, in the case of this license, I think that it's one step.  We've got a realistic business plan.  It's achievable.  We've got strong shareholders here that are, you know, don't need a return tomorrow.  They're not looking for a quick buck.  None of us are going to get paid.  I'm the only one that needs a job.  We've got shareholders that are committed to this that want to give back.  This is not, this is not a business deal for this group.

 

2590    When they asked me to come get involved, I was honoured.  I, of course, had known of all of these gentlemen -- didn't get to know them as well as I have over the last seven months -- and it was an opportunity for me to get back in the business and see if I can enjoy myself.  I had  a great time, great ride for 23 or 4 years and this group, I think it's one step and I don't know where it's going to end.  If we get your approval, we may be applying somewhere else a few months from now.

 

2591    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Then they wouldn't be local would they?

 

2592    MR. HOLTBY:  Yeah, but we'll deal with that later.

 

2593    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  How would you deal with that or is that a discussion for another day?  I have one more very quick question.  You have a category in here in your programming for regional, regionally produced priority programmes, and I'm curious to know what that would be, given that Vancouver doesn't qualify as a region? 

 

2594    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, that's part of the $900,000 that's not allocated to any specific programmes that I talked about this morning.  And the thought there, when we were putting together the budgets, was that there could be some shows that we would do outside, for example, in Victoria, on the Island, or outside that would be a reflection back.  And if you know some of the history of Chinese immigrants and South-Asian immigrants, there's some stories in the interior.  So, we don't have a particular project ear-marked for that, but that's the thought process that there would be some reflection back into Vancouver.

 

2595    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Thank you.

 

2596    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Commissioner Grauer.  Commissioner Cardozo.

 

2597    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  A couple of quick questions.  I just wanted to clarify, Mr. Holtby, in terms of where you would get your English American, English language, American programming from.  Could you tell us again who you see buying that from?

 

2598    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, we have filed as part of our application letters from both CHUM and Craig, and I have a letter from CTV that they would be willing to work with us.  We started the discussion with CTV because of the news and I phoned them up and I asked if we could get access to video and then it has expanded.  They would like to work with us.  In fact, they would like us to be their preferred supplier, I said, look, let's get a little.  Ivan was very good, he said look, we could do it very loosey-goosey if you like because it's not the time. 

 

2599    In addition to that, the reality of this business is, if we're successful and Rogers isn't, we'll work with Rogers and I'm sure, I've known Rogers, we've been partnered -- one of our companies at WIC was a 50/50 partner with Roger, a radio rep company.   We've had a long association with the pay companies and we will work with them.  We'll find a common ground on helping them and them helping us.

 

2600    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I mean in terms of the CHUM part, I thought you said earlier in discussion with Commissioner Wilson that CHUM may not be that fertile for you because they've got two station and they will be using up a fair about of what they can get their hands on.  So is it more CTV and Craig and what you mention about CFMT?

 

2601    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, CHUM had, I don't really have a feel for what their commitments are in Victoria with CKVU, but they really have two systems now in Ontario and now in British Columbia.  There will be differences between them.  I don't know what they are but they've indicated that they would like us to be on their tower and they'd like to work with us. We've had, as I say, a long history of working with CHUM, they're great broadcasters and so, I don't see, I doubt that there's a lot of inventory from CHUM.

 

2602    Global, which I haven't talked to -- I've just, they've been so busy that Leonard hasn't returned my calls, I guess -- But I was on a board with him -- for them for a number of months.  I think Global have product and if there's -- and CFMT were saying that they're laying off some of their national rights.

 

2603    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What you're thinking is that the companies with two stations in the market and there's likely not going to be a lot of leftover inventory?

 

2604    MR. HOLTBY:  No, no, I'm not saying that actually.  In the case of Global, they are very much first run, both stations are very much first run.  When we owned the two stations, CHAN and CHEK, we had common CTV product through both and the Commission discouraged us from differentiating the two, with the exception of local reflection and local news over in Victoria.  And as I understand it now, Global has two stations that are very much different.  And they're very much first run.  Global is not is the strip business.  I, frankly, I don't know that they're broadcasting any strip at all.

 

2605    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Let me ask you then, quickly, about public service announcements and sponsorships and I know I've been chiding you and Mr. Viner yesterday about upping the ante on some of the benefits that they were proposing, but this is not, and in a competitive situation you can't change what you've put forward, but just give me a sense of what your practice is with your radio station presentably with your public service announcements and things like community sponsorships of events.  So you do that kind of stuff habitually and would you be planning to carry on, planning to do that if you got the television license?

 

2606    MR. HO:  Well, it is important once we start the tradition, we shall continue with our tradition.  With our radio station, we have probably 10  of the sponsorships airtimes et cetera.  And in the last two years, up until February this year, we did the calculations.  Just in two years time, we did over, just about a million dollar of airtime for the public benefit sponsors.  It is not in our commitment to do that kind of money but there's a need.

 

2607    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  All right.  I see here, sorry, Commissioner Wylie was just pointing out on the -- that you do have on 4.2, section 4.2 you do indicate $410,000 over the seven years of public service announcements.  Is that correct?

 

2608    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

2609    MR. HOLTBY:  That's production.

 

2610    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  That's the production and then you don't count in the cost of --

 

2611    MR. HO:  We didn't count in the airtime or any of the airtimes on top.  I mean, like I say, we have a very different culture, I think being in British Columbia.  We sometimes speak conservatively.  There are things that we will count in and there are things that we didn't count in so maybe creating a bit of a confusion on your part when you read it.

 

2612    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thanks.

 

2613    MR. HO:  Thank you.

 

2614    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Commissioner Cardozo.  Mr. Holtby --

 

2615    MR. HOLTBY:  Excuse me, yes.

 

2616    MS. DEOL:  Sorry, I just, while we're talking, I just, sorry, sorry Madam Chair.  I just wanted to clarify something that we had talked about earlier when we had talked about what's the importance of local and multiethnic ownership and when I said that what works in Winnipeg or what works in Toronto or what works in Vancouver is not as interchangeable as somebody from the outside may think.  You took that to be the model of programming and what I really meant was the sensibility and the attitude of both the station and the viewers.  They are unique, dynamics that happen within different ethnic groups here. 

 

2617    Just one small quick example, you guys talk about the repatriation of revenue.  My insight here is that there is a repatriation of culture with some of the, you know, older families.  Whether it's Chinese families or the Indian families.  When they first came over in the early 1900s, I think, there was a lot of assimilation and now the younger people -- and by younger, I don't mean in their teens, I mean people who are 30, 40 -- they are starting to find a new pride in who they are and where they come from.

 

2618    And I think that this multiethnic station is going to play a very important role in this city right from the get go and that role is only going to grow as its viewership grows.  Not just because of new people coming in, but because of the people who are already here who have this sudden new love of, you know, who they really are because you know where you come from you can either embrace it or you can run away from it.  And if you run away from it, you can run, but you can't hide.  Eventually you have to confront who you are.

 

2619    And the fact that the owners are local and that they are multiethnic, they have a vested interest in the well being of the multicultural mix here.  It's not just about dollars, it's not just about business.  They have children here, they have grandchildren here, they're not going anywhere.  Whether they get the station or not, they are here and their top priority is Vancouver. I just wanted to add that in as well, sorry, because I don't think I said that properly this morning.

 

2620    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thanks.

 

2621    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Holtby, absent, even absent the fact that you're on both the same frequency, you and your shareholder colleagues, or would you and your shareholder colleagues have a problem with two ethnic stations in Vancouver?

 

2622    MR. HOLTBY:  I didn't hear that question yesterday.  I think, realistically, Madam Chair --

 

2623    THE CHAIRPERSON:  You have 30 seconds to answer.

 

2624    MR. HOLTBY:  Well, I think that you licensed a new station in Victoria, we had the changeover of the Global acquiring the WIC stations and now CHUM owning CKVU.  I think with all these digital channels, I think it would be difficult.

 

2625    This sort of reminds me back when we were in the -- that question was raised when we were applying for pay television and we all said no, only license one.  And the Commission license, gave us our regionals - we had regionals in Alberta and Ontario - but also a national and a cultural channel.  I think I need to talk to my shareholders.

 

2626    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Which means that we're going to have to choose and I suspect even Mr. Segal wouldn't like that responsibility, even with his optimism.  So, choosing means trying to compare and look at what may happen.  So, I have put one beside the other, your two 4.1 sections, which is our economic data, your financial operations and 4.2 because it looks at expenses spent on programming, which, of course, these schedules are made by the Commission for broadcasting purposes.  So they are divided into operating expenses and non-operating, in a broadcasting sort of way, presumably to look at what will end up on the screen to serve people.  They are peculiar to this industry and to its regulation. 

 

2627    So you have pointed out yourself that the revenues are very similar, which they are, which often, the revenue projections, which often is a level of comfort for the Commission because presumably you can't both be wrong.  If I look at your operating expenses, which will drive what will be on the screen, both foreign and Canadian, both mainstream and ethnic, they're also very similar.  I'm being very simplistic here, but you'll both have an opportunity to reply, in reply if you have a problem with this.

 

2628    Then, if you look at non-operating expenses, the LMtv depreciation and interest vary substantially.  These are business decisions that we're only vaguely, or less interested in than the operating expenses.  And then there's the famous producers fund, which then increases their expenses to a large extent.

 

2629    If you look at the body of the interventions, you'll find to a large extent, as the applicant has pitched, that that's very important and should be what we look at.  You and some of the other body of interveners, "No, no, no, local ownership is what's important."  And one side says, "Well CFMT knows how to do it, they've done it and maybe you don't know how to do it."  Others say, No, no, doing it in Toronto is not the same as doing it in Vancouver."  So that's equal.  We have to balance all of that at the end of the day and that's something you've said many times today, at the end of the day.

 

2630    At the bottom of all this you, because of the differences in expenses that I've focussed on, your economic projections, your financial projections show that you'll be in a profit position in year four and LMtv will be losing money for seven years.  That's at the end of the day.  Now, Mr. Segal has talked about selling raincoats.  But, you know, if it's raining and you can't afford a Giorgio Armani raincoat, you buy a cheap umbrella.  But when you're doing broadcasting, the programming's got to be on the air and it's got to be quality or else your situation gets worse and worse.  All of that, to my question to you, you have said it many times, what happens if you also are in a deficit position for seven years?

 

2631    MR. SEGAL:  Can I answer that for a minute?

 

2632    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I've heard you, Mr. Holtby say, no, no, we'll put some more money into it.  How much?  Are all the shareholders in the same position?  Because other than the producers fund and the idea of the local ownership and can you do it, you haven't done it before, they have, they have the expertise, there's also the financial commitment to make it work.  And I send you back, Mr. Holtby to your very first comment this morning, which was CJNT didn't do well and CFMT didn't tie there because they were under-capitalized.  So, I want to know, from all of you, what's your commitment to this?  So that, that aspect of it is more clear and we have the others left to balance.

 

2633    MR. SEGAL:  I will speak for the shareholders and we would not be here if there was not a commitment to see this thing through, to provide the best service.  There is some pride of authorship.  And as a shareholder, I believe that our numbers are realistic.  And if I were a shareholder of Rogers, I would certainly not advise going into an enterprise that seven years down the road will have $80 million of cumulative losses.

 

2634    So, we're here, we'll manage the store.  We'll make sure that every dollar that's invested, will be invested in the right way to provide the best program, the best audience, reach the best audience, create the best audience so that the revenue line, the top line will be automatic.

 

2635    MR. HOLTBY:  Madam Chair, I'd just like to respond to one of the comments that you made in this, the argument that they haven't done it -- and I, 14 years ago, Rogers hadn't done it -- and if the Commission looked upon that as a criteria, you wouldn't have Shaw Cable, because Jim Shaw hadn't done it when he got half of Edmonton.  You wouldn't have Rogers because Ted hadn't done it until he got his FM station in Toronto. The Commission has looked upon applicants and said, yes, I believe in these people and I think these people can do it. 

 

2636    I'm probably the only one in this room that's ever launched a television station.  I was running a television station when I was 27 -- only about five years ago.  But this group can do it.  We've got a very good operator of a radio station, knows the ethnic community.  We've all experienced business.  I'm involved in other businesses, they're very similar in many ways.  One of my businesses that I'm involved in is a regulated business -- it's not broadcasting but you've got certain requirements. It's the same kind of model as broadcasting.

 

2637    We've promised these commitments -- not only to you, but to the citizens of Vancouver.  I can tell the Commission one thing, is that none of us really wants, at this point in our careers, to have a failure.  So, we will give it whatever guidance and resources that are necessary to make it work.  And there's no question in my mind.  I've been lucky in my life and I've not had a failure and I don't plan on starting at this point in my life.  And my friends are the same way, I'm sure.

 

2638    MR. LEE:  I made a commitment.  You know, I've been committing, you know, at my age, probably 25, 20 years ago, I probably wouldn't because I wouldn't have the resources or the experience but now, being what I went through the last 40 years in business, this is something that I really want to help the community with, which I've been doing all my life after starting 20 years ago when I was on the board at UBC.  So I made a commitment and I think we have really the right shareholders because we really handpicked people that are behind us, my partners, we worked with them.  We've had ups and downs with them in business and we all came through, so I feel that we're all in the same boat.  We want to make this thing work and to help the community.

 

2639    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Lau, we won't ask because he'd have to phone his wife. Counsel?

 

2640    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Thank you Madam Chairman.  I just have a few questions to wrap up, a few questions of clarification.  This morning you referred to the potential for children's programming in your schedule and I just wanted to clarify whether that was reflected in the current block schedule that you have in your application?

 

2641    MR. HO:  That is geared towards the Japanese hour.  It is, again, in the reflection in the Japanese Lifestyle in the morning of Saturday, Sunday morning.  So that's in there.

 

2642    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Another small point of clarification.  This morning you referred to the $150,000 per year for direct training costs and we didn't clarify exactly where we can find that in section 4.2 in your schedule if you can clarify that?            

 

2643    MR. HO:  I would like Phillip to answer this.

 

2644    MR. MOY:  The direct training costs of $150,000 is more or less included in the various breakdowns of the expenses that you see in section 4.2.  Some of it would be in news, some in long form, documentary, information and drama, music, variety and so on.  So it's built in there.

 

2645    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Okay, so I'd also just like to clarify.  In you deficiency response or July 30^th letter, you stated that although the morning or afternoon or evening news may have differences that you had counted them as two hours a day of original, making 14 hours a week, of course, and I thought I heard you mention just a little while ago that you would have 28 hours of original news and I wanted to clarify what the number was of original news that you have included.

 

2646    MR. HO:  Twenty-eight hours. 

 

2647    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  So then I assume that when you discuss that there could be differences, the intention is that the morning and evening news, will be, it will not simply be a repeat then, so it's a bit modification on the deficiency?

 

2648    MR. HO:  It will not be simply just repeat.  There will be modification updates.

 

2649    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Again, this morning in your discussions about minimum levels of commitment to independent production, I believe you referred to both 16 percent of the schedule as well as 10  hours and I wanted to clarify given the 16 percent is slightly more than 10  hours, precisely what your commitment was.

 

2650    MR. HOLTBY:  Sixteen percent of 60 hours is 9.6 hours, so we said ten.  So we would agree to ten.

 

2651    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Of the 60 hours?

 

2652    MR. HOLTBY:  Yes.  And just to clarify, is that 10 original hours?

 

2653    MR. HOLTBY:  No, that's not 10 original hours, no.

 

2654    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Do you have the proportion of original versus repeat?

 

2655    MR. HOLTBY:  It really depends on the programme.  I, some of the examples that we gave, provided to the Commission would be repeated more than once.  For example, Yoga and You.  But I think we'd be safe to say no more than five repeats and five originals.

 

2656    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And with respect to the $4.5 million to be allocated to independent producers, I just wanted to clarify which producers would qualify.  In your application you referred to the money as being available to producers in Western Canada and I just wanted to clarify that the intention is that it be available, I assume then in Alberta and BC and not just BC?

 

2657    MR. HOLTBY:  I can't imagine, it's ethnic programming and I would think that it would be for independent producers in Greater Vancouver, that's our intention.

 

2658    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And again, to clarify the level of local programming that you're committed to do, in your discussions today you mentioned that the 55.5 percent was the absolute minimum but the 60 hours was your expectation.  I just wanted to clarify for the record what the level of your commitment is.

 

2659    MR. HO:  It's not 55.5 percent.  It's 55.5 hours.

 

2660    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Hours, yes.

 

2661    MR. HO:  What we have shown here is actual hours shown here of 60 hours.  If you can hold on just one quick moment here, let me just find out one quick figure here.  Yes.

 

2662    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And just to confirm what you mean by local then.  Is that produced in the Greater Vancouver area or within BC.

 

2663    MR. HO:  Yes.

 

2664    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  To the former?  Greater Vancouver?

 

2665    MR. HO:  Greater Vancouver, yes.

 

2666    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And I just wanted to clarify what you were counting as local.  At page 108 of your application, your schedule 17, you have a section under D, Canadian acquired and they're identified as regional.  I thought I heard you mention today in parts of your discussions that some of these might be local when you were describing the programming so I just wanted to confirm the programs listed under the Canadian acquired section in schedule D, whether these would be counted as local or not.

 

2667    MR. HO:  The Canadian acquired ones.  What we have done is we have used examples of Canadian content will not be -- it will be Canadian content, produced in Canada, but it will not necessarily be local.

 

2668    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Okay, so it's not limited to locally produced, Canadian acquired, we're talking nationally.  Okay.

 

2669    MR. HO:  Yes, it could be national.

 

2670    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Now I just wanted to confirm the level of third language programming to which you're prepared to commit by way of conditional license?

 

2671    MR. HO:  The level third language that we're prepared to commit is a minimum of 60 percent.  I'm sorry, just one sec.  Sorry the third language you're talking about is --

 

2672    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Third language.

 

2673    MR. HO:  Third language is 50 percent.  That's in our opening statement.

 

2674    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And with respect to ethnic, I believe in response to Commissioner Wilson's question, you clarified that you would be willing to commit to 60 percent.

 

2675    MR. HO:  The ethnic, yes, has taken the Commission format of 60/40 with a minimum of 60 percent and increase it as we have room to do that.  And we're starting at this moment at 68.3.

 

2676    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  But the commitment is to 60 percent.

 

2677    MR. HO:  Minimum 60, yes.

 

2678    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Also, I believe it was Mr. Ho this morning indicated that MVBC is committed to ethnic programming during the prime time period between 8:00 to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week and I just wanted to clarify what your commitment was by way of condition of license to ethnic programming during the 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. period.

 

2679    MR. HO:  News programs.

 

2680    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Well, what level of ethnic programming would it be, 100 percent if it were seven days a week.

 

2681    MR. HO:  Yes, seven days a week, 100 percent.

 

2682    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And then with respect to the number of languages, and the number of ethnic groups that you're committed to serve by was of a condition of license, if you could clarify the numbers, just for the record.

 

2683    MR. HO:  Twenty-two in languages and 22 communities.

 

2684    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Thank you very much.  Those are all my questions.  I just wanted to note that, given that we will have some information to be filed tomorrow morning by MVBC, I should note that should LMtv have any specific comments in relation, solely to that material, they would have the opportunity to make any comments in relation to that in their reply.  Thank you Madam Chairman.

 

2685    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Counsel.  Did somebody have -- I will give you the usual three minutes to answer the questions we didn't ask, but I want to see before whether it's agreeable to the parties to go right into Phase II and instead give you a ten, twelve, fifteen minute break before reply?  Is that acceptable?  Phase II would be where you intervene in each others application and normally parties prefer a bit of time between that and -- oh no, the replies are only after all the interventions.  So we won't. 

 

2686    Do we need a break before we go into Phase II then?  No?  So, we'll hear you in conclusion and then we'll just take five minutes to change groups and then go into the interventions.

 

2687    MR. HOLTBY:  A wrap up?

 

2688    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.  No, but I was asking before whether it was agreeable to both parties to not have a break between now and the intervention in each others application.

 

2689    MR. HOLTBY:  We're ready to go into intervention.

 

2690    THE CHAIRPERSON:  So we'll give you your wrap up time and then we'll proceed with Phase II.

 

2691    MR. HOLTBY:  I'll start and I'm sure some of my colleagues would like to say a few things.  I'd like to first thank the Commission for a very thorough hearing and thank the some 1,500 interveners that supported this application and a special appreciation to our advisory council.  Many of them have been sitting through two days, their first time in front of, watching a CRTC hearing and they're doing this out of love for their city and love for their communities and we really do appreciate it.

 

2692    We hope that we have demonstrated to you that we've developed a responsible, achievable proposal.  We all are responsible.  We've got a business plan that contemplates the shareholders, the five of us putting in significant money, $12.5 million of our own money, into the project.  We are committed to this.  We are committed to our community.

 

2693    I think this application brings a number of benefits to the city and to the ethnic community.  The fact that four of the five shareholders are, in fact, ethnic I think bodes well for the future of this television station.  The fact that we have identified 13 fabulous advisory members that will help us respond to their respective communities and the communities at whole, I think is a testament. 

 

2694    We have promised, just with council and with this hearing, commitments to the Commission that exceed the ethnic policy and we will deliver on those promises.  We have, with that commitment, we in fact will do more than CFMT that's been in operation some 20 years, so I think it's a significant commitment.  The programming will be very reflective of our communities through the advisory council and our own shareholder group.  We've got tremendous community support. 

 

2695    But at the end of the day, the success of this television station will come down to the quality of programming that we will deliver and the relevance and sensitivity of our programming to our viewers.  And you have our commitment that the state of the art facility that we're going to produce or build, that there will be an ethnic station that I hope will set a new standard for ethnic stations in this country.

 

2696    And we are all local.  That word has been used a few times today and in our application, but we do believe firmly that local is better.  We have a strong local advisory group.  We're all local residents here.  If people aren't happy with the, with our service or how we're portraying them, they can get us on the phone.  Our names will be attached to this and I -- if you look at other examples, I think it's a well known fact that local ownership will produce a better product. 

 

2697    They understand their market.  I think that's especially true with ethnic broadcasting.  As a matter of fact, I don't think there's an ethnic broadcaster with the exception, I guess, of the Montreal station now, that is owned by anybody other than the local ownership.  I guess we could say Rogers is local in Toronto.

 

2698    And finally, I would just say to the Commission that that's a realistic plan, that I think the Commission should, I hope will take a chance with the new players.  This industry, I think, is going to need new blood if, I have to say, if this group doesn't qualify for a broadcast license, I don't know how we would improve upon it.  Impeccable credentials.  We wish you well in your deliberations and we'll see you at intervention time in a few moments.  And again on behalf of everyone, I'd like to thank you all for a very thorough examination. 

 

2699    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Even Mr. Segal is speechless.  That was not an invitation.

 

2700    MR. SEGAL:  I thought it was.  I'll keep it very brief.  Firstly, this is the first CRTC hearing that I've ever attended and I've found it very invigorating.  You know, it wasn't what I expected.  You've made everyone feel so relaxed and for that, I thank you.

 

2701    I just want to reiterate that we do not take this investment lightly.  It doesn't matter how much you spend, it's how you spend it that creates the effectiveness.  And I'd like to thank our advisory board because some of them have been sitting here for two days; they don't get paid for it, they've come -- they even pay their own parking.  I think that's an indication of belief in what we're trying to do.  So I hope in your deliberation that you give us due consideration and thank you very much.

 

2702    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  That completes Phase II, Madam Secretary and, Phase I, excuse me and we will move to Phase II.  We'll stay in the room and change the panel, otherwise, we're into another ten, fifteen minutes. And for those who are intervening, we will go into Phase III after a 10  minute break.

 

 

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1738 / Suspension à 1738

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1742 / Reprise à 1742

 

 

 

2703    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Secretary.

 

2704    THE SECRETARY:  Thank you Madam Chair.  A reminder that Phase II is where the applicants re-appear in the same order to intervene against the competing applicants and 10 minutes maximum is allotted.  With this in mind, I invite CFMTtv to begin whenever they're ready.

 

2705    MR. WONG:  LMtv would be happy to.  It's been a long 24 hours since we last saw you, so we'll just remind you.  I'm Glenn Wong, general manager of LMtv and with me are Mason Loh, the vice-chair of our advisory board, Madeline Ziniak, the station manager of CFMT and Tony Viner, who's the president of Rogers Media.

 

2706    LMtv filed a detailed written intervention with respect to the MVBC application and we will briefly review the key points in that intervention and we will address a few additional issues arising from the MVBC presentation of its application.

 

2707    Based on the criteria that the Commission set out in the call for applications, we believe that there are four major deficiencies in the MVBC application.  Number one, service for the local community.  In its call for applications, the Commission asked the applicants to demonstrate how their service would reflect and meet the needs of the multicultural, multilingual and multiracial population of the Greater Vancouver area.  Clearly MVBC and LMtv have very different visions of how best to serve and reflect our ethnic communities based on a very different approach to multicultural issues. 

 

2708    We have found it very difficult to understand exactly what is being proposed in the MVBC application.  MVBC has not provided the Commission with the clear plan for the development of its local ethnic programming.  However, from the sketchy information that is available in their application and from their video presentation, it seems that MVBC believes that the role of a multilingual television station is merely to present the faces of our communities and their customs and other light entertaining programming.

 

2709    Many of the programmes that MVBC proposes are simply described as Lifestyle programmes with no further elaboration.  Cooking and yoga programmes are passed off as cross-cultural.  Some programmes arbitrarily combine the groups to be served with no regard for significant cultural or linguistic differences.  And now in the last hour, literally, MVBC has added 14 more hours of original news and this is in contrast to MVBC's schedule filed, schedule 17, program descriptions for both newscasts.

 

2710    We take a very different approach.  We believe that a multilingual television station has a profoundly important social mission.  After September 11^th, our world in North America has changed. We've lost our innocence.  We must not lose our acceptance of others and this is vitally important to reflect and serve the communities.  A multilingual television station must deal with real issues, such as portrayal, while at the same time reflecting our communities successes and celebrations.

 

2711    We've provided the Commission with detailed descriptions of our programming.  Those descriptions clearly set out how LMtv's programs will address issues and concerns in each of the communities that we propose to serve.  Detailed descriptions are also provided for LMtv's issue oriented national and local cross-cultural programming and for relevant and responsive programming directed towards particular segments of the audience, such as women and youth.

 

2712    In addition, we have included many other programming and service enhancements that will give us the tools to fulfil the programming mission of our multilingual television station.  Such as an LMtv news bureau in Victoria, a LMtv reporter in Ottawa and a LMtv news presence in Asia Pacific.  By contrast, MVBC proposes a news gathering arrangement with CTV.

 

2713    We filed with our application extensive codes and procedures to deal with important social issues such as violence and portrayal.  In the context of a diverse multilingual and multicultural programming environment, they have not filed anything.

 

2714    We also have included well funded local and national initiatives to promote positive portrayal.  From our extensive community consultations, we know that our communities have very high expectations of a multilingual television station.  The programming proposed by MVBC will not meet those expectations.  Nor will it meet the expectations that the Commission has set out in its call for applications.

 

2715    Number two, contribution to the Canadian talent development.  In it's call for applications, the Commission asked applicants to describe the means by which they will promote the development of Canadian talent, including local and regional talent.  We originally thought that MVBC had committed to spend $4.5 million on independent production over and above day to day operating requirements.  From the questioning this morning, it appears that that is not the case and there's still many unanswered questions. Who are the independent producers?  Where is their programming on the schedule?  What is the nature of the business relationship?  Who will hold the copyright?  What are the license fees?

 

2716    And then there's the question of the new $900,000 that will apparently do many, many things, such as support independent production, create a raft of special programmes, where no such programmes currently exist and even fund a full-length movie.

 

2717    In contrast, we've made it clear and we've had measurable commitments.  LMtv will spend $27 million dollars to support the development of a strong and vibrant, third language independent production industry in British Columbia.  Decisions will be made here in Vancouver by LMtv programming staff in consultation with the LMtv advisory board.  This substantial commitment is possible because LMtv will have the benefit of significant operating synergies with CFMT.

 

2718    Number three, an ever changing MVBC business plan.  In it's call for applications, the Commission asked applicants to support their business plans with an analysis of the market and potential advertising revenues.  We submit that the ever-changing MVBC business plan should raise serious questions in the mind of the Commission with respect to the long-term viability of the proposed new television station.  For example, there was considerable discussion this morning about MVBC possibly doing up to 68 percent ethnic programming.  The advertising revenues in the MVBC business plan are projected based on the 60/40 model.  They have assigned rating points to some ethnic programming as if it were English, non-ethnic.  If MVBC were really to do 68 percent ethnic programming, its business plan would be impacted dramatically.  This could mean a 20 percent reduction in their English advertising revenues, representing a loss that could be up to $27 million over the term of the license.  MVBC would not achieve profitability over the term of the license.  MVBC's stated plan to do 68 percent ethnic programming appears to us to be misleading and would not be economically viable.

 

2719    Fourthly, local ownership or quality programming.  MVBC appears to believe that ownership by local investors should outweigh the fact that their application is deficient in comparison to our application on all of the criteria set out by the Commission in its call.  We believe that what local audiences really care about is the quality of the television programming that they will receive.  They want it to be of high quality to meet their needs and to address their interests and that is where MVBC simply will not meet the test.

 

2720    MVBC claims that they will better serve our local ethnic communities simply because they are local investors.  In fact, as I've already noted, there is not evidence in their application or their programming plans to support their claim.          

 

2721    Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, for the following four reasons, we believe that it would not be in the public interest to approve the MVBC application:

 

2722    One.  The MVBC programming vision falls short of the real needs, expectations and aspirations of our communities. MVBC will not provide the best and most effective local multilingual local television service.

 

2723    Two.  MVBC will contribute far less to Canadian talent development and to the local community.

 

2724    Three.  The MVBC business plan is unlikely to sustain the operation of a television station over the long term.

 

2725    Fourthly and finally, the fact that MVBC will be owed by local investors does not ensure high quality programming, community responsiveness or the depth of knowledge and experience necessary to deal with complex linguistic and cultural sensitivities.

 

2726    We appreciate this opportunity to present our views on the MVBC application and would be pleased to answer any questions you have.

 

2727    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much, Mr. Wong and your colleagues.

 

2728    MR. WONG:  Thank you.

 

2729    THE SECRETARY:  We'll invite Multivan Broadcasting Corporation to come forward.

 

2730    MR. LEE:  Thank you Madam Chair and Members of the Commission panel.  I am Bob Lee, Chairman of Multivan Broadcast Corporation and with me are James Ho and Doug Holtby.

 

2731    We oppose the Rogers application and submit that it should be denied for reasons which include the following. It does not meet the requirement to demonstrate the requirement to demonstrate financial viability.  It is not a local application rooted in Vancouver's multicultural community.  The commitments are unrealistic because they exceed the actual performance of CFMT achieved after 14 years of operation and despite the much smaller market to be served.  The programming is not sufficiently local in focus with its use of Toronto based programming. 

 

2732    Rogers has presented an unrealistic business plan that projects a pre-tax loss of $67.4 million over the course of seven years license term.  It has chosen to finance its capital costs, its pre-launch expenses and its operating losses through the use of $80 million of Rogers Media credit facility of $148.75 million.  There is no shareholders' equity in this financing plan, consequently, Rogers has an interest expense of $29.3 million over seven year term and will still owe the bank $80 million at the beginning of the next term of licensing.  The Rogers business plan does not have a margin of error to deal with even a short term economic downtown.

 

2733    The Commission should also look at the pattern of losses being projected by Rogers.  In section 4.1 of their application, shows that the loss decreases by approximately 20 percent annually.  Projecting this out to the next term means that Rogers cannot break even until after the 15^th year and after a further aggregate loss of some $20 million.

 

2734    Mr. Viner stated that if they are awarded the license, they'll be around for more than one term.  Well, they'll have to be around for at least three in order to return a profit.

 

2735    In supplementary brief, Rogers indicated that in the unlikely event that LMtv does not achieve its projected revenue, the Commission can be assured the station will have access to the financial resources necessary to fulfil all its commitments.  But during the CFMT license renewal hearing, Mr. Viner referred to statements by Ted Rogers that the division of Rogers Communication, each have their own separate boards of directors and their own separate financing, and although, we co-operate with one another, it is the business imperative of each division that are foremost.  Given this description of how Rogers family of companies operate, one must question how responsible this application is, given the magnitude of the losses projected.

 

2736    MR. HO:  Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Local focus is central to the Commission's ethnic policy and to the successful provision of responsive ethnic programming that will meet the needs of the public.  The executives at Rogers know this and that is why they have tried to portray their application as local.  They have even changed their marketing logo for the purpose of this application.  In their last application, LMtv's stood for Lower Mainland television.  The Commission will note that it now stands for Local Multilingual television.  But try as they might, this is not a local, multilingual television station.

 

2737    Rogers has talked about their eight years of preparation of this application.  It is amazing that after all this time, they have yet to name the members of their advisory board, other than the co-chairs, or establish relationships with independent producers.  It is not necessary to wait for the word of the license to do these important things. 

 

2738    MR. HOLTBY:  We would urge the Commission to compare the Rogers' application in Vancouver with the reality of its service in Toronto.

 

2739    CFMT is a mature and profitable broadcasting operation with access to a market of approximately 80 percent of the population of Ontario, through transmitters in London, Ottawa as well as Toronto.  CFMT has access to more than four times the population of Vancouver, but the commitments put forward by Rogers for its Vancouver station greatly exceed its operations at CFMT.  The commitments proposed in Vancouver should not be looked at in isolation but should be looked at in comparison with CFMT.

 

2740    IT is interesting that the Commission found it necessary to require Rogers to increase its Canadian content by one percent per year so that in five years they will attain 55 percent.  They propose to launch Vancouver with 60 percent.

 

2741    Keeping in mind, that multicultural television is intensely local, one can better appreciate the conundrum that Rogers faces in presenting this application.  It has a successful multicultural station serving Toronto and wants to project that operation as a reason it should be licensed in Vancouver but at the same time it wants to convince you and the local ethnic communities that it will be local rather than an extension of the Toronto station.  It's ethnic broadcast experience based on Toronto is not readily adaptable to the Vancouver realities.

 

2742    Let me now address some issues relating to programming.  I suspect we are on common ground with Rogers when we say that programming is the heart and soul and most important element of any television operation.  The synergies identified by Rogers relate to the 40 percent non-ethnic programming.  Rogers proposes to amortise the cost of such programming over two rather than one operation.  But as Rogers has said in this application and also at the time of the CFMT license renewal July 2000, it is increasingly necessary to buy national rights for such programming.  They will have to purchase such rights whether or not they get the Vancouver license.  Rogers will still have another outlet to sell its programming should MVBC receive your approval.

 

2743    Rogers has claimed $1 million in community grants over the initial seven year license as part of its Canadian programming expenses.  Well, as it is admirable for Rogers to have recognised the exemplary work of non-profit organisations in Vancouver, we would point out that such donations should be made in the normal course of business and personal participation in our community.  We feel it is a civic responsibility that should not be tied to a measurement of who receives a broadcasting license.

 

2744    The predominant issue in this proceeding is how a proposed service will reflect and meet the needs of a multicultural, multilingual and multiracial population of the Greater Vancouver area.  Upon a close examination, it will be seen that the Rogers LMtv application is unrealistic.  The business model and the economics of the Rogers application with losses for the first 15 years of operation is not sustainable.  The application begs the question of how Rogers can commit to a higher level of performance in Vancouver in terms of Canadian content, independent producers, numbers of languages and multicultural groups serve them after 14 years of operation in Toronto with a market of over eight million people?  This application by LMtv does not add up and we respectfully submit, it should be denied.  Thank you.

 

2745    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Mr. Holtby, Mr. Ho and Mr. Lee.  I gather this ends Phase II.  We will take a 10-minute break and proceed with the interventions, Phase III and we'll see both of you back in reply.  Thank you.  We'll be back at 6:15.      

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1803 / Suspension à 1803

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1818 / Reprise à 1818

 

 

 

2746    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Madam Secretary, please.

 

2747    THE SECRETARY:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Our first intervener in Phase III is Fairchild television and I remind all of the interveners that we have a 10  minute maximum on presentations.  Please go ahead whenever you're ready.

 

2748    MR. CHAN: Good afternoon, or rather, good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission.  My name is Joe Chan and I am president of Fairchild Television.  On my left is Calvin Wong, senior vice-president of Fairchild Television.  On my right is Alex Johnston, our legal counsel from Goodman's.  We appreciate the opportunity to appear and discuss our concerns regarding the applications before you.

 

2749    Fairchild recognises that in last February's report to the Governor in Council, public notice, CRTC 2001-31, the Commission has found the need to license a new multiethnic service in Vancouver. However, we believe this can and should be done in a way which maximises the diversity of programming available to Vancouver's multiethnic communities and minimises the impact on existing ethnic services.  While some ethno-cultural groups in Vancouver are currently under served by the media, the Chinese community is well-served.  We are concerned that another service directed at this market will be duplicative of existing services and have an adverse impact on the already saturated Chinese language advertising market.  Should applicants be prepared to commit to a condition of license limiting the percentage of Chinese language programming in a schedule to 10 percent during the broadcast day, Fairchild would withdraw its opposition.

 

2750    In the report to the Governor in Council, the Commission recognised their state of uncertainty in the Vancouver/Victoria television market and the possible impact that the introduction of the news station may have on existing broadcasting services in that market.  Fairchild is acutely aware of the challenging dynamics of the Vancouver Chinese advertising market, which have made the common ownership of Talentvision and Fairchild television a necessity. When Fairchild acquired the assets of Talentvision in 1993, the Commission agreed that Fairchild television and Talentvision could not both be viable if held by separate owners.  While Fairchild operated at a loss, for several years, and has worked hard to make these two services viable, new realities have presented themselves, which made profitability a constant struggle. 

 

2751    The economy of this region is not nearly as robust as the applicants have suggested.  The slowdown has been particularly felt in ethnic advertising markets.  Immigration patterns have changed and today the majority of new Chinese residents are from Mainland China, rather than Hong Kong, with a very different economic profile.

 

2752    Our annual return for the 2000/2001 broadcast year, we show that our advertising revenues in the Vancouver market have dropped by 7.5 percent in the past year.  These are difficult times and events surrounding September 11^th, have compounded an already challenging economic situation in Vancouver.  Such that, we are projecting a further 7 to 10 percent decrease in advertising revenues for the 2001 and 2002 broadcast year.

 

2753    It is within this context that we are extremely concerned about impact of a new ethnic service on our existing services.

 

2754    MR. WONG:  Talentvision is now a national service providing about 80 percent of its programming in Mandarin, with 15 hours of programming in Vietnamese and 14 hours in Korean each week.  Talentvision's current 18,700 subscribers virtually all live in the Greater Vancouver region, and the service relies on the local Vancouver market for 80 percent of its advertising revenues.

 

2755    Each week, Talentvision provides 12 hour of news, five hour of current affairs and seven hours of Canadian locally produced programming, including Living in Canada, a show devoted to helping Mandarin-speaking immigrants adapt to life in this country and Business in Vancouver.  In the report to he Governor in Council, the Commission recognised the significant contribution Fairchild makes to the communities it serves.

 

2756    Approximately 30 percent of the programming on Fairchild Television and Talentvision is Canadian and 29 percent of their revenues go to Canadian programming expenditures.  We are extremely proud of the significant hours and the quality of our Canadian productions on both services, which have won broadcasting and journalism awards and which we increasingly export abroad.

 

2757    Rogers is proposing a multilingual service similar to its format on CFMTtv Toronto.  Of a total of 126 hours of programming each week, approximately 10 percent will be Chinese language programming.  Rogers projects $1.3 million in Chinese advertising revenues for year one, and we believe that the vast majority of this money will come from existing Fairchild services.  The impact of licensing this service on Fairchild Television and Talentvision would be significant.

 

2758    Multivan has proposed a service for Vancouver which is also directly competitive with Fairchild Television and Talentvision.  It is proposing to provide 20 percent of its programming in Cantonese and Mandarin.  It is projecting revenues of 3.1 million for third language advertising in year one.  Logically, we can project from this that approximately half will come from the Chinese market.

 

2759    Both applicants emphasize that ethnic communities in the Vancouver region are currently not well served, yet propose only to serve the Chinese and South-Asian communities in any depth.  Both applicants acknowledge that there are already two speciality television channels, three radio stations, four daily newspapers -- but I must add, since we submitted our intervention, the revised number of daily newspapers in the market is only three as one recently folded because of a lack of advertising revenue -- plus magazines providing significant service to the Chinese community.  Each week there is a total of 176.5 broadcast hours of Cantonese television programming and 288 hours of Cantonese radio programming, plus 135.5 hours of Mandarin television programming and 67 hours of Mandarin radio programming.  This is hardly the profile of an underserved community.

 

2760    The applicants own research findings show that, unlike other communities surveyed, only the Vancouver's Chinese community is very satisfied with their ethic programming.  Forty-four percent of respondents in Multivan's research sample said that there was enough quality programming in their own language, while only 28 percent felt there was not enough.  This was the highest satisfaction level of any ethnic community surveyed.  Both applicants' research spells out that the Chinese community in Vancouver is being served and it is begin served well, whereas the needs of many other ethnic communities are being neglected.

 

2761    MR. CHAN:  We accept the need for a new over the air ethnic service in Vancouver but do not believe that Vancouver's Chinese community or the objectives of the Broadcast Act are well-served by licensing a new service at the expense of another.  Nor do we believe that this would be consistent with the Ethnic Broadcasting Policy as set out in Public Notice CRTC 1999-117.

 

2762    While we recognise that any new service will have a Chinese component, a new service should provide greater diversity to the Canadian broadcasting system and to Vancouver's ethnic communities.  To the extent that there are gaps and underserved communities, these should be addressed by services which specifically target these communities.

 

2763    Sensitive to the concerns of existing ethnic broadcasters, conditions of licenses were imposed on Fairchild's ethnic radio service in Toronto, CHKT AM, restricting the amount and timing of Chinese programming.  Similarly, when our FM license was issued for Vancouver, there were restrictions on the amount of Chinese language programming, in order not to impact on existing licensees.  More recently, conditions of license limiting the type of programming distributed were imposed on Talentvision in becoming a national service.  The Commission emphasised the need for separate and complementary services.  Fairchild submits that similar sensitivity and consideration should be extended to the Vancouver market.

 

2764    Chinese language programming represents the vast majority of the audiences, and virtually all the revenues, for Talentvision, which is currently 80 percent dependent on Vancouver's Chinese language local advertising market for its advertising revenues.  Chinese language programming provides all of the audiences and revenues for Fairchild Television, which derives half of its local and national advertising dollars from the Vancouver market. 

 

2765    THE SECRETARY:  Excuse me, your 10  minutes are up, could you wrap-up quickly please?

 

2766    MR. CHAN:  Well, given that most of the proposed services in the third language advertising revenues would come from Chinese and South-Asian programming, it is difficult to understand how either service would not have the very adverse impact on the revenues of Talentvision and Fairchild Television.

 

2767    Fairchild recognises that there is desire on the part of the Commission and the government for a new multiethnic conventional service in Vancouver.  However, we feel strongly that the Chinese community in Vancouver is already very well served and that the Chinese language advertising market cannot sustain another service substantially targeting this community without serious harm to existing Chinese language services.  Fairchild believes it is not in the best interests of the Canadian Broadcasting System to award the licenses to either of these applicants unless a condition of license limiting to 10  percent Chinese language programming is imposed on any new service licensed by the Commission.

 

2768    We thank you for your attention    and we would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

 

2769    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Mr. Chan, Mr. Wong and Ms. Johnston.  Commissioner Cardozo please?

 

2770    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thank you Madam Chair.  You raise a number of interesting questions.  I'm going to try and go through them very quickly, not out of any disrespect to you, but out of respect to others who want to be heard as well, so bear with me if I have quick questions and your quick response will be appreciated.

 

2771    You said you would them to be limited to 10  percent Chinese language programming and as Mr. Wong noted, the LMtv application is about that -- it's about 11 percent -- but then Mr. Wong, you said that's a challenge to you.  So, shouldn't I read though that they are pretty close to that 10  percent and you would find the LMtv proposal satisfactory to you?

 

2772    MR. CHAN:  Well, as a matter of fact, to us, you know, any impact will be substantial to us.  It doesn't mean that that 10  percent will be for us, will be good.  No.  So 10  percent was translated into roughly about $1 million to $1.3 million -- of course, I could go into that in detail if you would prefer.

 

2773    And, you know, when we studied both schedules both presented by LMtv and Multivan, and we, of course, reviewed that.  The best scenario for us is not to have any.  Of course, in reality, it would not be possible.  To look at both schedules and to look at what that 10  percent translates into, which I said is about $1 million to $1.3 million and to us, you know, while substantial but we could live with that.

 

2774    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So, if they capped their Chinese language programming which I assume is a combination of Cantonese and Mandarin when we're talking Chinese at 10  rather than the eleven and that was imposed by condition of license, you would find that acceptable?      

 

2775    MR. CHAN:  As what we put it down on our written and oral presentation, we will accept that.

 

2776    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  For either applicant?

 

2777    MR. CHAN:  Yes, but it's 10  percent.

 

2778    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Right, at 10  percent, yes.  You said that you feel the Chinese speaking community is well served with your service.  Two points.  One is there's also the question of accessibility, where as when your service is not over the air, not conventional, not on the tier, how do we compensate for that?  I mean, we've got to, should we not be sensitive to that and be willing to provide that and show that Chinese language programming is more widely acceptable?

 

2779    MR. CHAN:  In fact, this is one of the reasons why we would accept a certain amount of Chinese language programming on a competitors because we know that we intervened before in the last two rounds and we also appreciate the fact that there are certain numbers of public, general public, Chinese community out there who are not in a position to watch our program, because they haven't paid or they will not pay for certain reason.  And it is this based on this reason that we would, you know, you may regard this as our contribution to the community, that we would take that amount of limited amount of Chinese programming on another service.

 

2780    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You say on page 7 of your oral presentation, "To the extent that there are gaps and underserved communities, these should be addressed by services which specifically target these communities."  Two things.  In order to have a viable multilingual service, it's got to have a sizeable chunk of programming that is serving the largest communities.  Second, what are your thoughts about what model would work.  Would it be a 60/40 model with these limits on Chinese?  Or is another model, like some of the other ones proposed?

 

2781    MR. CHAN:  What we mean -- by, you know gaps and, what's the word used, to fill in the gaps because we well appreciate the huge number of other minority ethnic groups in town.  And no doubt about it Chinese and South Asian are the two biggest.  In order to make a multiethnic TV concept work in town, there's no point of giving a huge amount of programming on the two major groups whereas the rest of the minor and smaller groups have only half an hour or a token one hour a week.  It doesn't really serve the purpose.  And so that is the reason why we propose to have some kind of restrictions on the two major language groups.  Because already you can list --

 

2782    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  But in order to get programming to the other communities, what is your suggestion about what model we should be looking at?

 

2783    MR. CHAN:  You mean, giving them a little bit more hours?

 

2784    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Yes, I mean, getting all the other communities more than the token half hour or --

 

2785    MR. CHAN:  More than a token half hour.

 

2786    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  -- or hours.  Perhaps you can give me your thoughts on the Shaw Multicultural channel.

 

2787    MR. CHAN:  Because we have, I personally have been with the multicultural television for over 10  years, more than 15 years and all this time we have been in sort of the pay mode, with Cathay TV and Fairchild TV.  So, we well understand that, you know, token sometimes, token compliance by having half an hour or an hour a week or so, it doesn't really serve the purpose for serving the community.  You know, at least you may say, you may have four or five hours for programming for a certain community that would, I would say, at least is meaningful.  But, of course, if you spread it out to maybe 20 or so language groups, you need more hours to do that.

 

2788    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You need three or four channels in order to get everybody four or five hours wouldn't you?  And how do you finance all of that?

 

2789    MR. CHAN:  Of course, under a perfect scenario, of course, we may have to sometimes, we may have to determine, sometimes the more may not be merrier in terms of servicing 20 or 30 language groups.  May not be real, not actually competing who have more language groups.  Sometimes you have to give them quality programming, rather than, giving them half an hour.

 

2790    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  We have got to talk to the communities who get zero, not you.

 

2791    MR. WONG:  Yes, Commissioner Cardozo, if I may try to answer the question is that you see from the Fairchild model is that when ethnic population reach a critical mass, you know, a national specialty can work.  Because, you know, through that, you know, the national population across the country, you know, they can create that advertising market plus the subscription money that we can generate.  And then, through your CRTC condition of license, we are bound to carry so much percentage of Canadian content and we have to spend so much money on making Canadian programming.  And then by telling you two statistics you can tell that what we've been hearing about quality programming, quality ethnic programming, the last two days, if you look at television, you know, rating are the strongest argument, the strongest currency.  Do people watch the television program?

 

2792    And in the Toronto situation I want to tell you that basically, Fairchild co-exists with CFMT, right?  Whereas CFMT is a free over the air station and Fairchild is a paid service.  There are two statistics.  One is by AC Nielsen, which is an independent research company doing television rating.  Of course, it is not done as regular as mainstream ratings, but we did it in a diary method that shows that during the prime time, more Chinese watch Fairchild than CFMT over all the age groups.

 

2793    And the second statistic is by Stat Can, which is, I think, in the Global television intervention you can see that, you know, counting all the non-English and non-French speaking population in Greater Toronto area, there are more people watching Fairchild, more people watch video at home, more people watch TeleLatino than CFMT, all language put together.

 

2794    So, basically, you know, the idea as Joe and I worked in the multiethnic broadcasting for the last decade, you know, we are on the trench, we are in the trench every day and night.  And then, I can tell you that it's my belief that you can get first rate ethnic program by, on an economic model, based on selling second or third rate American program. 

 

2795    So, I think, as last month, there are more than 60 new specialty digital channels that's available.  A lot of them are ethnic, a lot of them are ethnic.  And then for those populations, as I said earlier, Fairchild already pay for model that reach a critical mass.  That for those which is really small, we talk about 10,000 and 20,000 and things like that, I think that's why we come and say there are gaps, there are research done by all our friends at the research company.  They're saying that all these small groups, they need the service.  So in that respect, maybe the existing CFMT model will still work.  That based on the premises that even one hour a week is better than nothing, even two hours a week is better than nothing.  So that's how we see the ethnic broadcasting.

 

2796    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Those are my questions, thanks very much.  Thank you Madam Chair.

 

2797    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Counsel?

 

2798    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Yes, I'd just like to clarify, when you mention 10  percent, are you referring to 10  percent of the broadcast day, which would be in each an hour day or of the 24 hour?

 

2799    MR. CHAN:  We're talking about, correct me if I'm wrong, 10  percent out of 126 hours a week, so it's about 12.6 hours.

 

2800    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  And when we take the commitment that, in the case of LMtv has made, they refer to, I believe, 18 hours of Chinese programming which, when measured -- when the commitment made by LMtv is measured over the broadcast day, it amounts to a bit higher, 14 percent.  So I was just wondering if you can comment on whether the level of 14 percent is sufficient to address your concerns?

 

2801    MR. CHAN:  I think we should take a look at whoever will be licensed should not undermine the viability of the existing services or undermine our ability to continue with our quality local programming.  Because we see that with 10  percent, it's already translate into roughly about $1.3 million impact on our financial statements.  And if it is 14 percent what is proposed, so it would be more negative impact on our financial figures.  So, did I answer your question?

 

2802    COMMISSION COUNSEL:  Yes, thank you. 

 

2803    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Mr. Chan, Mr. Wong, Ms. Johnson.  Madam Secretary please?

 

2804    THE SECRETARY:  Our next intervener this afternoon is Chinese Community TV.  I invite Mr. Lee to come forward.

 

2805    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Welcome, Mr. Lee.  Proceed when you're ready.

 

2806    MR. LEE:  Thank you.  Good evening Madam Chair and members of the Commission.  My name is Wayne Lee.  I have been the executive producer for Chinese Community TV for the past 16 years.  Chinese Community TV, CCTV provides Chinese language programs in the Vancouver's Lower Mainland for the Shaw Multicultural Channel, formerly Rogers Multicultural Channel.

 

2807    As well as being involved in television programming, I was a former shareholder, director and Vice President of Operations and General Manager of Mainstream Broadcasting Corporation radio station, CHMB from its inception in 1994 to 1999.  Mainstream's owner is amongst one of five partners that represent the application MultiVan Broadcast Corporation that is before you today.

 

2808    CCTV offers an array of locally produced programmes, ranging form a weekly magazine program focusing on political, education and socio-economic topics to a weekly travel programming introducing travel destinations throughout the world.  We have also produced a weekly public service announcement advising our viewers on current events happening in the community.  We were instrumental in the co-production of a weekly lifestyle magazine program --

 

2809    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Lee, when we ask people to limit themselves to 10  minutes, we don't plan speedy delivery.

 

2810    MR. LEE:  Okay. All right.

 

2811    THE CHAIRPERSON:  We do have a court reporter and ourselves.

 

2812    MR. LEE:  All right.  I'll slow it down.

 

2813    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

 

2814    MR. LEE:  Okay, thank you.  However, in the fall of 1998, Rogers had unilaterally cancelled all our local productions and implemented an overhaul of the Multicultural Channel program.

 

2815    As well as locally produced programs, CCTV also offers overseas programs from Hong Kong, Taiwan and the People's Republic of China, ranging form same day satellite news to variety and drama programming.

 

2816    CCTV has been a vital link and source of information and entertainment for the Chinese Community for the past 16 years.  We provide an alternative to the existing multicultural specialty television stations, namely Fairchild Television and Talentvision.  Throughout our past 16 years of operation, we have been involved in the community in many ways in fundraising activities with non-profit organizations, such as The Variety Club of British Colombia, B.C. Children's Hospital Foundation, United Way, SUCCESS and the Chinese Cultural Centre, just to name a few.

 

2817    CCTV is here today to oppose the applications by CFMT and Multivan Broadcast Corporation for a multicultural, multilingual television license to serve the Lower Mainland of Vancouver.  Both of these applicants depict themselves as serving the multicultural, multilingual communities of Vancouver; however, according to the program schedule they have submitted, it appears that both applications are interested only in programming to wards the South Asian and Chinese communities with a major emphasis in English language programs.  Second play English language programs are slotted during prime-time viewing hours with the other ethnic languages being relegated during the weekends and non prime-time viewing hours.

 

2818    In the previous hearing held in Vancouver in the spring of 2000, the vice-chair of the Community Advisory Board for CFMT, while referring to the local Vancouver community multicultural programming was quoted as saying they are "amateur efforts".  It is indeed ironic that during that hearing CFMT submitted an Environics poll that they had commissioned of Chinese and South Asian households on the viewing habits of existing multilingual services, which showed that the Chinese and the South Asian programming on then Rogers Multicultural Channel generated a positive response rate of 69 percent and 91 percent respectively.  CCTV on Rogers Multicultural Channel ranked far higher than both of the specialty services of Fairchild Television and Talentvision with positive responses of only 55 percent and 16 percent respectively.  This market study was conducted in May 1998, four months before Rogers implemented drastic scheduling changes on the Rogers Multicultural Channel which fragmented our programming and, therefore, our audience shares.  They also instituted tough new procedures that resulted in our inability to institute any local productions.

 

2819    The timing of the hearing of these applications pose some questions.  It has only been a little more than a year since Rogers appeared before the Commission with this same application.  Now-TV and CHUM were the successful applications in that hearing.

 

2820    Now-TV was launched on September 15, 2001, and CHUM's Victoria station commenced broadcasting on October 5^th.  It would seem reasonable and prudent that these stations be given a chance to establish an economic foothold in the marketplace before a new license is approved.

 

2821    The Commission had its own concern about the introduction of two new stations in the marketplace, and the effect it would have on existing licensees.  This was reflected in CRTC Decision 2000-219, where the Commission stated the following:

 

 

 

There was considerable discussion at the hearing concerning the ability of the Vancouver/Victoria market to sustain the introduction of new television stations.  The Commission is concerned that the new stations be introduced into a market in a manner that does not compromise the ability of existing stations to fulfil the programming commitments that they have made.  As indicated in Decision CRTC 2000-218, the Commission concluded that the introduction of the new not-for-profit religious station proposed by Trinity would have little impact on the revenues of commercial broadcasters while bringing a new voice to the market.

 

 

 

2822    As indicated in the Commission's Decision, Now-TV may not overtly affect the marketplace.  However, the effect CHUM's Victoria station, along with the effect it will have when the Commission approves CHUM's acquisition of CKVU-13 in Vancouver, is still unknown.

 

2823    The financial impact of licensing a new station and the effect it will have on existing stations has always been a concern to the Commission.  This argument of the financial viability of a new license and the possible impact it may have on the existing stations has been well expressed Global's intervention.

 

2824    However, a skilled observer could reasonably argue that under the present economic climate and market conditions, the approval of licensing a new station would, to a certain degree, impact the overall economic viability of the existing players in the market place.

 

2825    CFMT and MultiVan both submit that the bulk of their revenue and financial successes will be derived from the airing of second-play English language programming, which will, in effect, complete with the existing mainstream broadcasters.

 

2826    The B.C. economy is bleak, with much uncertainty.  The B.C. Finance Minister was quoted saying the following in a recent article in The Vancouver Sun, dated September 5^th, 2001:

 

 

 

"Virtually no growth" for province's economy. B.C. finance minister scales back projections. Finance Minister Gary Collins says the immediate future for the B.C. economy will not be as rosy as he predicted over a month ago.  Stalling economies in the United States and elsewhere in Canada are catching up with B.C.

 

 

 

2827    A follow-up article in the Vancouver Sun dated September 8^th, 2001, reported the following:

 

 

 

B.C.'s unemployment rate soars to a two-year high.  British Columbia lost 20,0000 jobs last month, pushing the provincial unemployment rate to its highest level in nearly two years. 

 

 

 

Statistics Canada said the B.C. jobless rate rose from 7.2 percent in July to 7.9 percent in August.  That's the highest rate since November 1999 and up sharply from 6.6 percent in March.

 

 

 

2828    Since the issuance of Now-TV and CHUM's Victoria licenses, the U.S. and Canadian markets, and more specifically, the B.C. market have experienced a spiralling economic downturn.  This will be compounded drastically with the unfortunate and tragic event that occurred in the U.S. on September 11^th.  Licensing a new station at this time will cause more uncertainty and financial difficulties in the market.

 

2829    Although the Shaw Multicultural Channel is not recognized by the Commission as a conventional commercial station, the history and mere existence of this channel has truly served the multicultural communities exceptionally well for the past 22 years. This is truly a channel that deserves the recognition and attention of the Commission in terms of the challenges and difficulties it has endured since its inception.

 

2830    The Shaw Multicultural Channel has operated under very stringent and restrictive sponsorship and programming guidelines.  This has been compounded with the negative schedule changes imposed by Rogers when it operated the channel.  Nevertheless, this multicultural channel still survived and through the perseverance of its longstanding producers have shown that multilingual/multicultural programming is a viable enterprise.

 

2831    The possibility that the Shaw Multicultural Channel may be taken off air if a new commercial multicultural channel is approved is a very serious concern to the many language producers on the channel and also to the ethnic communities they serve.  The language producers have devoted many difficult years nurturing their programming from their inception.  Through our hard work and decision, we have been awarded with both loyal supporters and viewers.

 

2832    Many Shaw Multicultural Channel producers also derive our livelihood from this business and consider providing television programming to our respective communities as our chosen profession.  We, the producers of the Shaw Multicultural Channel, are the most experienced and best equipped to provide multilingual/multicultural programming to our communities.

 

2833    For the reasons stated above, we request the Commission to closely examine the merits of these two applications.  The issuance of a new television license would not be in the best interests of the Vancouver broadcasting market or its ethnic communities who have less programming than they have now.

 

2834    We respectfully submit to the Commission that the next logical step is to allow us to compete equally in this market with full advertising privileges. and eventually a low power license once the Commission has completed its policy framework.  We are awaiting that policy framework in order to apply and did not do so at this hearing because the Commission mentioned in the current call for licenses in the Toronto market that any applications for a low power license will not be entertained until the policy review is completed.  However, I would like to bring to your attention that we, the producers of the Shaw Multicultural Channel. have filed with the Commission our intent for this low power application.

 

2835    We strongly urge the Commission to deny the application of CFMT and Multivan.

 

2836    This concludes my submission and I will be pleased to answer any questions of the may have Commission at this time.

 

2837    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Mr. Lee.  I have a few questions for you, but if you answer them as quickly as you did your presentation, I will be bewildered.

 

2838    MR. LEE:  I'll do my best.

 

2839    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.  I want at the outset to say to you that this whole issue of the Shaw Channel and the participants in it is, I suppose, a difficult issue and whatever questions I ask, you don't have to answer if it causes difficulties so feel quite at ease to say you don't want to discuss that or talk about it.  You're still involved with the Shaw Multicultural Channel?

 

2840    MR. LEE:  Yes, yes I am.

 

2841    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And do you still provide programming?

 

2842    MR. LEE:  Yes, we do.

 

2843    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Now, you mentioned, of course, some of the disappointments you've had in the past and you attribute reasons for them.  In your written presentation you mention programming like Agape Vision, if that's the right pronunciation?

 

2844    MR. LEE:  Yes.

 

2845    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And also community announcements et cetera.  Are these programs, or similar ones, back on?

 

2846    MR. LEE:  No.  They were taken off in 1998.         

 

2847    THE CHAIRPERSON:  So, you provide fewer hours now than you did?

 

2848    MR. LEE:  Yes.

 

2849    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And are there fewer hours of Chinese programming on the Shaw Channel - let's call it the Shaw Channel - than there were on the Rogers Channel?

 

2850    MR. LEE:  Well, what had happened since Shaw had taken over, Rogers has imposed restriction on the hours, and basically when Shaw took it over they maintained the policy.  They did not increase, nor did they change the procedures.

 

2851    THE CHAIRPERSON:  But you have, in fact, seen a decrease over the years since the multicultural was instituted?

 

2852    MR. LEE:  Yes.  Right.

 

2853    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Are you prepared to tell me, now are you the only company that provides Chinese programming to the Shaw Channel?

 

2854    MR. LEE:  Yes, we are.

 

2855    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Are you prepared to tell me what the percentage of foreign programming to locally produced programming is?

 

2856    MR. LEE:  Well, I would say 100 percent is foreign at this point.  We used to do perhaps 20 percent back in 1998.

 

2857    THE CHAIRPERSON:  So it's 100 percent --

 

2858    MR. LEE:  Foreign.

 

2859    THE CHAIRPERSON:  So you're really a distributor for some foreign parties that you can get material from?

 

2860    MR. LEE:  To some extent.  It's just that we're not allowed to do local anymore.  We've sent proposals in to do local production, but every time we send it in it gets rejected by the people at the --

 

2861    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And what reasons are given?

 

2862    MR. LEE:  There's no reason given.

 

2863    THE CHAIRPERSON:  What do you think the reasons are?

 

2864    MR. LEE:  I cannot answer that, Madam Chair.

 

2865    THE CHAIRPERSON:  What was it like when you were allowed to do it?

 

2866    MR. LEE:  I'm sorry?

 

2867    THE CHAIRPERSON:  What was it like when you could do the 20 percent local?  Like, what was the relationship then?

 

2868    MR. LEE:  It was more -- the relationship I would say was good.

 

2869    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I mean more financially, facilities, et cetera?

 

2870    MR. LEE:  Yes, we were provided with production studios, we were provided with ENGs, we were provided with a lot more things that we could go out to do things with.

 

2871    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Your company doesn't have those facilities?

 

2872    MR. LEE:  We only have the        editing facilities; we don't have ENGs.

 

2873    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is anybody at the Shaw Channel now using the facilities that you used to have access to in other languages or other cultures?

 

2874    MR. LEE:  That, I'm not privy to that information.

 

2875    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Why is it that you say that if we were to allow one of these services to be licensed that the Shaw Channel would be eliminated or closed down?  Are you prepared to talk about that?

 

2876    MR. LEE:  Well, we had actually a conversation with one of the senior managers at Shaw. Essentially what he's allowed to tell us is that business as usual but until, when and if a decision is made, they cannot make that decision whether the Shaw Channel will be on or not.  So they haven't given us an unequivocal yes or no, whether the channel will be taken off the air or maintained on air.

 

2877    THE CHAIRPERSON:  You say in your written intervention that you'll be joining other producers, and that paragraph is found in a number of the interventions.  You'll be taking over -- you'll assume the Shaw Multicultural Channel and you're currently negotiating.  What is the relationship now, and what would it be if you assumed the Shaw Multicultural Channel?  What do you mean by that?

 

2878    MR. LEE:  Well, we have provided with Shaw management a few different economic models in terms of doing a revenue sharing, where at this point in time they are, from what we understand, is maintaining running the channel, using their staff, doing playback, the administrating of the channel.  At this point in time we understand that is a money-losing proposition for them. 

 

2879    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, I assume that, number one, they're using an analogue channel for the purpose.  One whole channel is devoted to multicultural programming?

 

2880    MR. LEE:  That's correct.

 

2881    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And some of their facilities, and some of their administrative function  --

 

2882    MR. LEE:  They provide editing facilities for producers, yes.

 

2883    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.  So you would discuss with them an arrangement that would require an amendment to how the multicultural channel is, from a regulatory perspective, is conducted, right?  You'd want to do advertising?

 

2884    MR. LEE:  Yes, that would be our goal.

 

2885    THE CHAIRPERSON:  As opposed to just limited sponsorship?

 

2886    MR. LEE:  That is correct, Madam Chair.

 

2887    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And another possibility is you'd apply for a license.  Now, do you recall if the call from Toronto was after the call from Vancouver -- for Vancouver?  You relate to the fact that we said that in Toronto we didn't want to hear low power.  Do you recall whether that was in the call for Vancouver, which I think is safe to say preceded the one from Toronto?

 

2888    MR. LEE:  I don't remember quite the chronological order.  I believe it was before.

 

2889    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Would you be surprised if I told you it wasn't in there?

 

2890    MR. LEE:  You would know better, Madam Chair.

 

2891    THE CHAIRPERSON:  As you know, it's difficult for the Commission to look at applications and if it finds that the market can sustain another station to not give licenses on the basis of - it happens to us all the time, I'd like you to know - don't give a license because I've got a terrific plan in my pocket.

 

2892    MR. LEE:  I hope you can understand our situation.  This has been our livelihood, or my livelihood anyways, for the last 16 years and most of my other colleagues.  Some have been doing this for 20 years.  And we have been providing the service from day one.

 

2893    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, and now you have plans.  So it's difficult, if you've been doing it for 20 years, I suppose I could say that that was long enough to cook up something in time.

 

2894    MR. LEE:  But I'm afraid that we don't have the financial resources as, you know, as the applicants that came before me.

 

2895    THE CHAIRPERSON:  But you would need them if you applied for a license?

 

2896    MR. LEE:  I would think so, yes.

 

2897    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.  Now, this is your view about the result of licensing one or the other.  I have some other questions now that you're here, and one of them is your criticism that it should be 100 percent ethnic and with a station that is powerful enough to reach the Greater Vancouver area, what is, do you think that that's financially possible?

 

2898    MR. LEE:  It's hard to say because I'm not in that position, but if you look at the model of the Shaw Multicultural Channel, it is 100 percent ethnic.  It is 100 percent multicultural.

 

2899    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, but it's a channel.  You, yourself, for example, are providing foreign programming that you don't have to produce.  What we have before us are propositions.  You would know better than me how much it costs to produce local programming.  You're also aware that -- you never know, of course, the real reasons for it, but that that has been tried in Montreal, which is a large city, and has proven to be extremely difficult to be 100 percent multilingual and serve a broad number of parties and still be able to sustain it.  But I guess it's unfair to ask you -- I suppose it's unfair to make the comment that it's possible if you can't answer why it's not impossible.

 

2900    MR. LEE:  I guess the point that I'd like to add, Madam Chair, is that we would be doing local production if we weren't restricted.  I mean, that was taken away from us in 1998.

 

2901    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, I understand. You also say that Fairchild Television and Talentvision are here, we just heard them, and of course access is a question here of having to pay for the services, which may not be a choice or, you know, some families may not have the ability to pay, so a channel of course adds access.

 

2902    You also criticize in your written intervention that their prime time viewing hours are devoted to English language programming.  Are you aware that the 8:00 to 10:00, I think the commitment of LMtv is 75 percent ethnic and I think I understand Multivan to have said 100 percent between 8:00 and 10:00.  So you say prime time is 6:00 to 10:00, it's true from 6:00 to 8:00, not from 8:00 to 10:00, which is ethnic.

 

2903    We are, of course, sympathetic to your concerns.  They're very real.  The world moves on, of course, and people have to adapt to what's going on.  What efforts are being made by you and other producers on the Shaw Channel to attempt to make sure that this doesn't occur?  Is it mostly your negotiating a different financial arrangement that may be more acceptable for them?

 

2904    MR. LEE:  That's one of the models we've been discussing, but at this juncture it's a stalemate.  They don't really want to talk to us until they see what's happening with this application.

 

2905    THE CHAIRPERSON:  What is your view about the role of the cable company?  Is it because the cable company finds that it has a civic duty to serve the multicultural community, and if it's served by somebody else then it will abandon it because there's no money in it?  Or is it because this way they'll be in a better position to compete with other distributors by having something that the other distributors can't have?  I'm talking about satellite here. Is there a changing world there that could be to your advantage,  that the producers together could sell the idea to Shaw that they should continue because that's a plus for them in the more competitive distribution world?

 

2906    MR. LEE:  That's one of the, I guess, the points that we're trying to get across to Shaw people because there is that satellite competition out there, but at this juncture we are at a position that we are talking to them, but yet there's no response back.  You know, we're talking to a big company here.

 

2907    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Do you feel that your involvement before as a producer is such, and remains such, that despite the fact that you're now only providing foreign programming you would find a source for the use of your skills and, obviously, your interests with a new station if it were licensed?

 

2908    MR. LEE:  If the occasion arises.  At this juncture there's no offer.  It's hard to say.

 

2909    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Well, presumably they shouldn't offer you anything until they have a license.

 

2910    MR. LEE:  That would be in a perfect world.

 

2911    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I'm just trying to put a more positive cast on all this and I urge you to do the same.  Thank you, Mr. Lee.  I don't know if my colleagues have other questions.  Counsel?  No.  Thank you, Mr. Lee, we appreciate you staying so late with us but, as I said last night, we stay awake and alert very late so we're pleased to have seen you.

 

2912    MR. LEE:  Thanks very much.

 

2913    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

 

2914    THE SECRETARY:  Our next intervener this evening is Telitalia TV program.  I would invite Vito Bruno to come forward.  Mr. Lee, you're going to stay, are you?  Thank you.

 

2915    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Welcome, go ahead when you're ready.

 

2916    MR. BRUNO:  Yes, good evening.  My name is Vito Bruno.  I produce the Italian program, Telitalia on Shaw Multicultural Channel. For my presentation, I would like if Mr. Lee can read my intervention because I wait so long today that there's some illness and so I feel really bad and pain my back, so he will read my intervention.  I have some problems speaking.  Thank you.

 

2917    MR. LEE:  I promise to read slower this time.

 

2918    MR. BRUNO:  It was a long day for me this day.

 

2919    THE CHAIRPERSON:  You're still here, Mr. Lee.

 

2920    MR. LEE:  You can't get rid of me, Madam Chair.

 

2921    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  He's Mr. Bruno's reader now.  You're not going to read in Italian?

 

2922    MR. LEE:  No, no.  I'll read in Chinese if you'd like.  Do you want to introduce what you do and what we produce first?

 

2923    MR. BRUNO:  Yes, I've been in this business, broadcasting business, since 1977, the radio until 1998, TV from 1988 to present.  I have done radio on CJVB, CHMB and 96.1.  I believe there is still more; you go ahead, yes.

 

2924    MR. LEE:  I will take over for Mr. Bruno.

 

2925    Madam Chair and Commissioners, the first thing I would like to point out is that this is not a multicultural channel.  In my opinion, when only 60 percent is multicultural and even less in multilingual, this is not a multilingual/multicultural channel.  Programming in English should not be such a significant part of a multicultural channel because we have enough English programming on the other channels.  People who do not understand English because they are new immigrants or seniors, for example, only have this channel.

 

2926    If you license this primarily English channel, my community, as well as others, will lose prime time programming because according to the applicants' schedule presented for Monday to Sunday, there will be prime time service in only three languages and for only two communities - Chinese, South Asian and English.  Other communities will receive service only during the weekends and not all will receive service during prime time.  As for my community, which happens to be the fourth largest community in the Greater Vancouver area, we will only have 30 minutes to an hour in the morning or late on Saturday evening. Small communities will not have access to programming.  At least now on the Shaw Multicultural Channel, which is open to all communities in the Greater Vancouver area, even the smallest community receives at least 30 to 60 minutes of programming per week broadcast in prime time.  The applicants who have come before you don't offer this.

 

2927    What you see today is a channel created mostly by us, the producers, because we are the ones that know the reality and the needs of our communities.  We are in constant contact with our communities because we are part of them - not people from back east or people who have never had experience in the TV business.  Just by changing their name from Lower Mainland TV to Local Multilingual TV doesn't make them local or multilingual when, in fact, they are owned by Rogers Cable of Toronto and much of the programming is in English.

 

2928    Do you think that if all of this had been made public to the communities, they would support the applicants?  I don't.  I don't think so.  This is where LMtv from Toronto and Multivan have misled the communities.  For example, with my community, at the present time, we have 4.5 hours of original prime time plus extra repeat programming.  How can the community be better off with 30 to 60 minutes per week being offered at a weird time in the applicants' schedule?

 

2929    I would like to point out that in order to get support, the applicants will offer the moon, while at the same time calling us "amateurs".  After a few months, they will do as they please.  They are only interested in the communities that bring them the most money.  The rest of us are second or third-class citizens in their eyes and they won't even want to talk to us.  It is like presenting a house for sale without showing the plan and saying, "Trust us.  It will be built professionally and will look beautiful at the end."  Madam Chair, Vancouver has enough shoddily built leaky condos.  We don't need shoddy programming and leaky programming schedules.

 

2930    I know that since there is no longer such a regulatory requirement, you may not be able to impose on the Shaw Cable the requirement to keep the Multicultural Channel in operation.  However, my fellow producers and I are in negotiation with Shaw Cable about this and would like to continue to program for the channel.  I respectfully ask you, Commissioners, couldn't the Commission at least take into consideration our proposal and allow us to compete at the same level, granting us the same access to advertising?

 

2931    What my community stands to lose is three times the amount of programming that they have now, if you license one of these applicants and Vancouver stands to lose a 100 percent ethnic channel.  We have always produced local programming.  We have covered local events, produced bilingual - Italian and English programs, telethons, sports, quiz shows, social issues such as domestic abuse, sponsored in part by the Department of Canadian Heritage. For example, mine was the only TV program that covered the World Cup 1998 series every day for the season.  This coverage was 30 minutes per day and was produced with local input.  If I am allowed to advertise I, too, can do a lot more local programming and make my programming even better.

 

2932    Rogers has called the Multicultural Channel programming of poor quality, done by amateurs and foreign.  I would like to bring to the attention of the Commission that the channel did start in 1979 as a foreign acquiring programming channel, but soon after, entrepreneurial producers, like me, started local programming.

 

2933    In 1998, Rogers dismantled the block programming on the Multicultural Channel and also took away our local programming by cutting our production budgets and putting tough controls on us.  This was done so that Rogers could come up with an application which could have consistent block programming of the ethnic communities after taking away ours.  So Rogers went to all this trouble to call us amateurs, then they would come in and promise the communities quality programming, but this is what we have been providing for year.

 

2934    In conclusion, I would like to say this is also my business, my livelihood.  If you grant the license for this primarily English language program, not only will the multilingual communities who have no other television programming choice in this market lose what they have now, I will be out of business and my staff will lose their jobs at a time when the B.C. economy is heading for a very, very bad time.  I, therefore, respectfully ask the Commission to deny both the applications.  Thank you.

 

2935    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Mr. Lee, for Mr. Vito -- no, Mr. Bruno. I have the two inverted.  Commissioner Grauer, please.

 

2936    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Thank you, Madam Chair, thank you Mr. Lee and Mr. Bruno.  You do now a total of, how much is it, 5 --

 

2937    MR. BRUNO:  4.5.

 

2938    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  4.5 hours of programming.  And can you tell me, how is that financed?  And what I mean by this is, do you pay for the time, or is it given to you, and then how is your production financed, or your acquisitions, or how does it work, and what is it?

 

2939    MR. BRUNO:  Okay.  We don't pay the  -- we provide the program for the Shaw Multicultural Channel.  The money, the revenue comes from the sponsorship.  So that's --

 

2940    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  So you essentially put together four and a half hours of programming?

 

2941    MR. BRUNO:  Yes.

 

2942    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  And you sold the sponsorships for it?

 

2943    MR. BRUNO:  Yes.

 

2944    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  And then you deliver it to Shaw and they broadcast it?

 

2945    MR. BRUNO:  Yes.

 

2946    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  So you don't pay any costs of the --

 

2947    MR. BRUNO:  No, we don't pay them; they don't pay us.  We just provide the programs for Shaw.

 

2948    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  No exchange of any --

 

2949    MR. BRUNO:  What they receive in a way, saves Mr. Lee, like, editing time.  Editing pay.  But I have my own facility, so I do my local programs with my own.

 

2950    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  SO you have your own production facility?

 

2951    MR. BRUNO:  Yes.  I have my cameraman, I build everything, yes.  I have my own studio, yes.

 

2952    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Now, I also take it the way you've presented this that you're assuming that if, in fact, the Commission should choose to license one of these applicants, when you say that we will lose this, that you're assuming that yours will go -- that you will be replaced somehow, or do you just --

 

2953    MR. BRUNO:  I don't see a future because already now is a little bit in the limbo.  Like, we don't have no more than three months contracts on the channel, on Shaw Multicultural Channel.  So, say Mr. Lee, we wait, they wait, the businesses waits now and they wait and see what's going to come out of this hearing.

 

2954    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Do you know that, or is that what you're guessing?

 

2955    MR. BRUNO:  I don't know that.  I can't say if this will happen or not.  It's your  decision, so I don't know.

 

2956    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  One of the reasons that I'm asking is that I appreciate that you do quite a bit of local programming?

 

2957    MR. BRUNO:  Yes.  Well, one thing we didn't put in because again, I have problems, I have pain in my back, okay, so I've got problems, so that's why sometimes I can speak, so I'm sorry.

 

2958    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  That's okay.

 

2959    MR. BRUNO:  I've been doing with B.C. Children's Hospital a local program since 1991.  I raise over $800,000.  I am the chair in their board since 1991 to the present now.  Which you saw in intervention in 1998, Telitalia was the only program, TV program in Vancouver, which we broadcast soccer, which everybody was done in English, produced by me.  We just buy the copyright to show the highlights. All the comments, they were made by professional soccer players from the National Team of Canada.  So we've done all these things.  We done other -- we have telethon for S.S. Guatemala telethon and that's a local production but.  In 1998, the change came and they offer only half an hour local time, the local programs, yes.

 

2960    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  What happened in 1998?  Did they just change the way they allocated the time because, you know, certainly, I know in the regular community channel I think they always rotate kind of groups for access.  The model is to sort of not -- when they're offering free access it's an attempt to kind of --

 

2961    MR. BRUNO:  Okay.  Before '98, each one of us involved in the community, that a block of programs, two or three hours, maybe two or three times a week, there were blocks, so somebody would see it.  But after that, let's see, to speak for my program, in one day I believe I had four or five programs fragmented in half an hour; one at ten o'clock, 1:30, 3:30, seven o'clock.  So people they, still today, they are confused in the community and I believe even the others, because that's why came this -- a lot of people just were mad about that, so that's a different scheme.

 

2962    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  So your proposal that you've made to Shaw, what is the financial model of that proposal?  And when I ask that, I guess what I'm saying is the moment you have access without having to assume any of the costs and the overhead of the broadcasting, what sort of model -- have you, in proposing this to Shaw, basically said, "Well, we will assume the management of the channel and we would like to have it be -- give us a part of the channel"; is that kind of --

 

2963    MR. BRUNO:  There were some proposals, but at this time it's all talk and so I don't know if -- 

 

2964    MR. LEE:  Can I sort of answer for Mr. Bruno?

 

2965    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Well, it's up to him, I guess.

 

2966    MR. LEE:  I hate to butt in, but essentially we propose a transition period with them  whereby there would be a revenue-sharing basis.  We would, you know, ask for Shaw to go to the Commission to ask for the relaxation and providing there is a  transition period, would go to a model where the income would be on a split basis with them and then, you know, to offset some of the operating costs of running the channel.  That was the proposal we provided.

 

2967    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Well, I don't want to get into that because, as our Vice-Chair Wylie has said, without something in front of us it's -- we can't deal with something that isn't here.  But we have fairly stringent requirements on people who own broadcasting licenses, that these special programming channels are kind of very flexible in terms of the amount of local or foreign programming they can do, how it's packaged, and whatnot, but they do have their restrictions in terms of advertising and sponsorships.  There's a lot of change that's going on in the broadcasting business, not just what you're faced with and, again, I'm surprised you don't see any opportunities for you here, that these, you know, these applications and the speciality services, indeed the specialty services that have been licensed, the new digital services, have a certain appetite for programming and it may involve working in a different way than you have before but, as I say, so do you see any opportunities for yourself in this?

 

2968    MR. LEE:  Well, Commissioner Grauer, we -- actually, our colleague, when the call for this application came up, you know our colleague, Shushma, did put in an application but at the eleventh hour the capital outlay, the costs of applying were just too phenomenal for us.  We had to pull back, we had to withdraw the application.  We did try different models.

 

2969    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Sorry.  What I meant was, any opportunities should we license one of these, or with any of the existing specialty services that there might be opportunities for you produce and sell to some of these stations, or is -- I mean, as I say, it may be a different business model, but that you've used with Shaw who, in fact, and they may not change their way of doing business either.

 

2970    MR. LEE:  Well, I think the Commission Chair, Ms. Wylie, had asked me that question and I responded so I think maybe --

 

2971    THE CHAIRPERSON:  But now you're speaking for Mr. Bruno.

 

2972    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  That's right.

 

2973    MR. LEE:  No, no, Mr. Bruno will speak on that --

 

2974    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And I don't believe you at all, that you don't like butting in.

 

2975    MR. LEE:  It's my nature.

 

2976    MR. BRUNO:  Well, the way, say they leave, Shaw Multicultural Channel keep there, keep on, you know, for us and then we play the same level, like the others, you know, we can compete, so.  See, what we don't have is the money, you know, but we have the experience.  We've been here for like me, since 1977, and I know really well the community.  I've done so much.  So if we, same level, you know, we can advertise.

 

2977    COMMISSIONER GRAUER:  Thank you very much.

 

2978    MR. BRUNO:  You're welcome. Thank you.

 

2979    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you again, Mr. Lee-Bruno and Mr. Bruno.  Thank you for your presentation.  We certainly appreciate your staying this late and expressing your concern to us.  Madam Secretary, please?

 

2980    THE SECRETARY:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  For the record, our fourth intervener, Global Television Network, will not be appearing.  Our next intervener is I.T. Productions Ltd., and I invite Sushma Datt to come forward.

 

2981    seq level0 \h \r0 seq level1 \h \r0 seq level2 \h \r0 seq level3 \h \r0 seq level4 \h \r0 seq level5 \h \r0 seq level6 \h \r0 seq level7 \h \r0 MS. DATT:  Age has caught up with me.  Good evening, Madam Chair, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen.  My name is Shushma Datt.  I am a broadcaster by profession.  In other words, I am a professional broadcaster.  I started my career in broadcasting 36 years ago in London, England with the BBC.  I'm sure you are tried of hearing this, but somehow the applicants seem to have missed it, because they keep referring to me and all of us as amateurs,  so I'm sorry I am repeating it.

 

2982    I have worked in radio and television here in Canada since 1972.  I am one of the founding members of the Multicultural Channel of Vancouver, which was licensed in 1979 as a Special Programming Service, providing programming for German, Chinese, Italian, South Asian, Japanese, Scandinavian and Greek communities at that time.

 

2983    In my capacity as a producer and on-air host, I do programming that brings an entire community together, not subdivides them.  I speak six languages, and I have programmed in five of these languages on the Multicultural Channel.  On my radio station, RimJhim, which was licensed in 1987, we broadcast in seven languages, South Asian languages.

 

2984    Please allow me to remind you of the status of the Multicultural Channel which has existed for 22 years, and is now called Shaw Multicultural Channel. During the first 13 years, we had various restrictions on what could be included in our sponsorship messages.  In spite of this, I have produced numerous well-balanced - I emphasize, Madam Chair - local programs on issues ranging from sex selection, violence against women, children and seniors, AIDS awareness, to light-hearted community magazine shows like What's New in Vancouver, or fundraisers for worthwhile charitable organizations like the Children's Hospital and others.

 

2985    I have purchased world-class programming from England, India, and Pakistan.  In fact, CFMT buys Indian News from the same supplier as I do.  With local segments and stories as an integral part of our program, the shows started getting recognition.  We started exchanging programs with Calgary, Montreal and Los Angeles.  That was then.  Now that we have shown them the money, as the saying goes, from ethnic programming, Rogers and Multivan are eager to cash in.  I feel it is my hard work that Rogers and Multivan wants to benefit from, as far as the South Asian community programming is concerned.

 

2986    The logical next step would have been to elevate our existing programming outlet to one that is fully supported by commercial revenue.  Instead, if a new channel is licensed, it will sweep the existing 100 percent ethnic programming aside, and replace it with programming which is primarily non-multilingual, and is already see on other channels, i.e. American programming.  It will sweep aside longstanding experienced producers from the community who have been programming for the past 25 years.  It is worth noting that applicants have not sought partnerships with, or offered even miniscule ownership, to any senior producers from the Multicultural Channel. Furthermore, this licensing action seeks to establish a new channel, whose viability had already been questioned eloquently by you, the Commission, when you denied it in the previous round.

 

2987    Both applicants estimated that they will be in the red for seven to three years respectively event before the market had to absorb two new stations, CHUM and NOW-TV, and a drastically deteriorating economic climate in B.C. which has taken the brunt of the softwood lumber levies, and the impact of the global recession triggered by the September 11^th crisis.  I draw your attention to media reports quoting government and business leaders.  Global TV and other interveners have amply illustrated this in their interventions.

 

2988    If Rogers truly wants to serve the immigrant population of the Lower Mainland, it should offer local multilingual programming almost exclusively.  According to both the applicants, multilingual does not support itself and needs American programming to sustain it, and has therefore relegated such programming to morning, afternoon, and weekends.

 

2989    The "real" primetime programming for the South Asian community and the LMtv proposal is only half an hour Monday to Friday, i.e., News in Punjabi.  In their previous application, they offered 11.5 hours of original programming, compared to 9.5 hours now, offering even less hours this time around.  The 250,000-strong South Asian population is underserved by program schedules of these applicants.

 

2990    Both applicants have opted to provide prime time programming to only 60 percent of the South Asian community who understand Punjabi.  If you discount South Asian youth, who constitute 20 percent, both applicants are really catering to only 48 percent of the community in prime time.

 

2991    I am discouraged and disappointed in respectable organizations serving the South Asian and other ethnic communities who will be appearing in front of you as well, who have supported these applicants without the least bit of scrutiny of the applicants' submission. 

 

2992    Rogers claims that they are the experienced multilingual broadcaster, so experienced that last time around they slotted a three hour Hindi movie in a two hour slot.  Rogers' approach to being the broadcaster has been to strictly prescribe and regulate content and format which they have arbitrarily rearranged since 1993, creating fragmentation of programming and confusion among viewers, a year, coincidentally, Madam Chair, in which Rogers first expressed their intention to seek a national network licence.  It is undemocratic and disrespectful of the needs of the community they serve.

 

2993    The subsequent years appear to have  been a careful orchestration of their position to get to this goal with the intention of blocking any competition, including from their own independent producers.  The outcome of their approach has been the destruction of any growth of professionalism in terms of television production in the community, I can only guess because they saw us as competition.

 

2994    Having 11 producers solely for the South Asian community has destroyed the commercial viability of any single program since they all appeared to be similar in content.  Many of them have video stores or are associated with them, and use their programming to do infomercials for their products. 

 

Small wonder that when Rogers conducted their focus groups, the community told them the programming is of poor quality.  How convenient for the applicant in this context of this hearing.  Interestingly, in their previous survey conducted by Environics, 91 percent of the South Asian community watched the programming I produced, which they now paint as amateurish.

 

2995    I have stayed with this channel with the hope that one day I would be able to produce even better programming for my community as a licensee.  However, the dreams I have for my community did not appear to coincide with Rogers' corporate goals.  That is why, along with my fellow producers we have, as you have heard already, filed an intent to apply for a low power 100 percent ethnic channel.

 

2996    Licensing LMtv will fulfil Rogers' dream of becoming a national broadcaster, allowing them to compete with other conventional broadcasters for national distribution rights to lucrative American programming.  In the process, they would also have the unfair advantage of being both the carrier and the programmer with a virtual monopoly of multilingual television in Canada.

 

2997    Multivan's schedule betrays their lack of grasp of program scheduling, and their lack of experience in multilingual television programming.  It almost seems like as if they picked up the 1999 LMtv application and repeated it with minimal changes.

 

2998    Both applicants have harped on the fact that what they are offering is free TV.  Since when has a channel carried on cable been free?  I pay for my cable.  By that token, the low power 100 percent ethnic channel that we propose would also be free.  By that token, so is Shaw Multicultural Channel free.

 

2999    This licensing action is primarily an offshoot of political lobbying backed by narrow corporate interests, who in the past have shown themselves to be less than admirable corporate citizens.  They appear to have adopted the underlying principle of advertising, i.e. that repetition of the message can construct any reality you want.

 

3000    Rogers has constructed the following reality, that this is a local station; witness the change of their name.  Many of the community leaders we have questions were adamant that this channel is not owned by Rogers, although they admitted they had not scrutinized the application.  During their appearance yesterday, Rogers confused the issue of local programming even further.  Thirty hours of original local programming per week, according to Rogers, may have international and national feeds, and yet be defined as local.  Madam Commissioner, when we do the very same thing it becomes foreign programming.

 

3001    Producers in the community were unable to provide an alternative to these primarily non-multilingual applications.  We appreciate the Commission's efforts to accommodate us, however, lack of time and conflicting call for applications and other regulatory issues hampered our efforts to file an application.

 

3002    Madam Commissioner, I'm tired as I am sure you are, of coming to the Commission hearing and requesting you, over and over again, to look into our concerns and issues, to protect us, and look after our interests.  Our communities, and we, need you to ensure that corporate giants don't use us and our communities as stepping stones to grow their empires.  The Commission's policy has always been to protect existing broadcasters.  Licensing such a station will have an adverse impact on my two South Asian digital channels before they are even launched and have a chance to get established, and on conventional channels and on the Multicultural Channel.

 

3003    This licence cannot be justified on the grounds of good economics, nor can it be justified on the grounds of increased or better quality multilingual programming.  It can only be granted as a reward for an exceptional public relations campaign, Madam Chair.  I, therefore, respectfully ask the Commission to deny these two applications.  Thank you.  I was fast. 

 

3004    Madam Chair and Commissioners, I will be happy to answer any questions if you have any.

 

3005    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Ms. Datt.  Commissioner Pennefather, please.

 

3006    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Good evening.

 

3007    MS. DATT:  Good evening.

 

3008    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you for staying with us so late.  I would like to ask you a few questions which take advantage of your career as a professional broadcaster and producer.

 

3009    MS. DATT:  Thank you.

 

3010    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And just ask you a few questions about production in this community, if I may.

 

3011    MS. DATT:  Sure.

 

3012    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  And then you've heard the questioning from my colleagues and --

 

3013    MS. DATT:  Yes.

 

3014    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- they may want to get your view on some of those points.

 

3015    MS. DATT:  Certainly.

 

3016    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  But just before we get there, you've been following the hearing, and as you know, we've had considerable discussion about independent producers in this community.  You are a producer, as well as a --

 

3017    MS. DATT:  I am an independent producer, yes.

 

3018    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  What kind of productions do you produce?

 

3019    MS. DATT:  We currently are producing three half-hour programs for NOW-TV.  We have produced programming for Los Angeles.  There's a station in Los Angeles for whom we have produced programs, and we will be producing a series of 13 programs for them in the near future.

 

3020    We have produced local programs.  When we started the Multicultural Channel, and before 1998, we did 10  and a half hours of South Asian programming original hours, out of which five hours were locally produced programming which would be anywhere from local interest lifestyle stories about families, professionals, common people in the community.  Our local magazine program is called What's New in Vancouver. 

 

3021    Actually, we were the first ones to start local programming on the Multicultural Channel, and have expanded that until 1998, when all those programming were taken away from us, but I still have about five hours of programming on the Multicultural Channel.

 

3022    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So there is the programming Multicultural Channel, and the impression that I got was also that you and other producers in the community have been working as professional producers for some time and are making genres of programming like a documentary, for example?

 

3023    MS. DATT:  Yes.

 

3024    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Can you tell me about the average cost - I know this is a rather broad question - but if you take some of the programs you described, what's their average cost, a typical half hour documentary?

 

3025    MS. DATT:  It depends.  We did a documentary called Kamagata Maru, a Voyage of Shattered Dreams, which has won many awards.  It can cost anywhere from $1,000 per minute to $3,000 per minute.

 

3026    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Per minute.

 

3027    MS. DATT:  And it depends.  You can put close to $400,000 in a half an hour program, or you can produce a half an hour program for $30,000.  We have our own production facilities with digital, non-linear editing facilities.  I would say that I've put in my entire life savings into production and our programming can be from anywhere from $1,000 for a half an hour program to $30,000 for a half an hour programming.

 

3028    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  So you mentioned your own contribution.  Where else are the resources to support the productions of third language programming in this community.  What are the resources?

 

3029    MS. DATT:  What other resources are there?

 

3030    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Financially, yes.

 

3031    MS. DATT:  Financially none, except for commercial advertising, which we don't have.  So our productions, even though we do not have that kind of money that both the applicants are currently offering to spend, we still feel that our quality of our programming on air looks good.  When I watched a programming on NOW-TV, I was a bit worried that -- we'd been called amateurs for so many years that you start believing that.  And I had to sit down and look at that channel, because our channel, Channel 20 is an impaired channel.  And the Multicultural Channel on which our programming comes, our programming doesn't look good, no matter how good the programming, no matter how good your production is.  So the same kind of production, when I sent the programming to NOW-TV, it looks far better than what it would look on that channel.

 

3032    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, that's a little bit of my point, and I think Commissioner Grauer made the point before.  Wouldn't you say though, that generally speaking, and there's no question in my mind that I'm talking to an amateur here; I'm talking to a professional producer.  And there are others like you --

 

3033    MS. DATT:  Well, thank you.

 

3034    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- and we talked about that with the applicants.  There was not an assumption that everyone -- the producers in this community are amateur; quite the contrary.  Don't you see the applications that are here?  Leave aside for a moment the Shaw --

 

3035    MS. DATT:  The personal, yes.

 

3036    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Not the personal --

 

3037    MS. DATT:  Sure.

 

3038    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  No, no, the Shaw --

 

3039    MS. DATT:  Right.

 

3040    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- Multicultural access route that you've taken, and there's a whole story there that we've talked about also with your colleagues, but as an independent producer in this community don't you see opportunities here for financial support for the kind of productions that you do?

 

3041    MS. DATT:  I'm so glad you've brought this up.  So did I.  I thought I was -- you know, when I first came here, I came from BBC, and when I came to Canada, I thought CBC would say, "Hey, Shushma's here.  She's from BBC.  We should hire her."  But I wasn't, because I had a thick accent and CBC did not hire me.  Same token; I felt that we've had a very good relationship with Rogers, that we would work together with them, but nothing came from them, no opportunities, no talk.  So am I -- are you asking me did I go and talk to both the applicants and work with them or --

 

3042    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Not necessarily.  Just generally speaking as a professional, and you did say, and we know that the financial resources for third language programming --

 

3043    MS. DATT:  There's none.

 

3044    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  -- in telefilm, or any of the other resources, they're not there.

 

3045    MS. DATT:  No, they're not there.

 

3046    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Here are two proposals in competition which include different approaches, but they do include putting money on the table to support independent production.  Isn't that a positive?

 

3047    MS. DATT:  If it works and if they follow through with it, yes, it is a positive step and positive offering from them, yes.  I agree there, yes.

 

3048    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  That's why, as well, I'm interested in the word you used today in your presentation here and your letter on file where you say that these applications will sweep away the independent production in the community.

 

3049    MS. DATT:  Mm-hmm.

 

3050    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Considering what you just said about the opportunities here, when you say sweep away, what do you mean?

 

3051    MS. DATT:  Well, look at their proposal of hours of programming that they're going to be doing.  LMtv is proposing a half an hour news in Punjabi, and I hope everybody understands that South Asians have got to speak three languages, a language of their province in India, and the two official languages, government language and official language. The official language of India is Hindi, the government language of India is English.  So if you're an educated person, studied in school, you would be speaking three languages.  You'd be speaking English; you'd be speaking Hindi, which is the national language of India; and you'd be speaking your provincial language, which in the case of the majority of the people living here, which are Punjabi, would be speaking Punjabi.

 

3052    In Vancouver there are more than 250,000 South Asians, out of which 60 percent speak Punjabi, 65 maybe, because we don't have accurate figures, but there are no more than 65 percent.  I've been here for 32 years, so I can say that.

 

3053    The rest of the 40 percent of the community is being ignored in prime time.  Why?  I mean, those programming -- I mean, I would -- I could go to Rogers and say, "Yes, I would produce a good programming for you, one hour Hindi language programming, one hour Punjabi language program," compared to the 10  and a half hours I used to do on the Multicultural Channel.

 

3054    So, in essence, what you are saying is that it will not sweep the producers away; it will just reduce their hours.  So isn't that better than nothing?  Is that what you're asking me?

 

3055    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, you used the term sweep away --

 

3056    MS. DATT:  Yes.

 

3057    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Or dismantle --

 

3058    MS. DATT:  No. I'm saying they will be --

 

3059    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  --  entirely the existing ethnic programming available.

 

3060    MS. DATT:  Yes, because we will not be hired by them.  If we were going to be hired by them, wouldn't they have talked to us?

 

3061    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, I'm not in a position to say whether they did or didn't, other than the fact that applications indicate that some producers in this community were, in fact, spoken to.  So I think we'll leave that at that.

 

3062    MS. DATT:  You're right, Madam Commissioner --

 

3063    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes.

 

3064    MS. DATT:  -- but the senior producers were not approached.

 

3065    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  There's just one last question in the sense of -- again, if you don't want to answer the questions regarding the statements you and others have made about the future of the Shaw Multicultural Channel as one source of programming, you've made the assumption again that this spells its demise.  On what do you base that?

 

3066    MS. DATT:  Many, many things.  The first thing that we base it on is that when Shaw took over we had met with them, and we got very positive vibes from them because they would like to continue with the channel, and so we proposed to them that we would like to bring the programming back to block programming, which was there before the 1998 dismantling of the channel.  We were given to understand that it cannot be done right away.  They have just acquired the Western Canadian -- or Lower Mainland channel, and they would like to take some time, and would like to talk to us after that.  Six months later when we spoke with them, we got a favourable reply from them saying, yes, we would like to look into it.  We started working on bringing the proposal after -- the channel back to normal, as I would call it, to block programming for the community.

 

3067    We were later on, when the call came up, given to understand that this conversation cannot go on because Shaw would like to wait and see the outcome of this hearing, and after that they would decide what they would like to do.

 

3068    Now, I don't know.  Maybe I'm paranoid, and I did read a book called, Only the Paranoid Succeed, but I don't want to be that paranoid.  So when I propose a program and only get 13 weeks of programming, I am not in a position to either program my programs or outline my programs. 

 

3069    Currently I have a drama that is 540 episodes, and I'm on episode number 191.  I still get three months' extensions on that, and if, say for example, because we are not getting longer term contracts, my feeling, and added to that, the statement by Shaw that business as usual, but we will not make long-term commitments until the outcome of this hearing, I guess one could construe that they would like to see what's going to happen.

 

3070    It is not a condition of their licence to carry this channel any more, and that very quietly was snuck away.  We wouldn't even know about that, otherwise we would have been in front of you again, saying the same thing.

 

3071    COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, thank you.  We're here actually to hope that people do come in front of us, and when it doesn't happen, as we found out earlier in this process, it can make us and others uncomfortable because we haven't heard the full story from all sides.  So we do appreciate you coming, and thank you for answering my questions.

 

3072    MS. DATT:  Thank you.

 

3073    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner Cardozo.

 

3074    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I just have a question, Ms. Datt, on a couple of alternate proposals that have been floating around, and has been noted they're not up for consideration at this hearing, but I'm just wondering what your thinking is.

 

3075    If we were to licence one of these two applicants, could there still be a second service which would either be a low-power multilingual television, or what I'm hearing is a re-vamped Shaw Multicultural Channel which the ability to advertise?

 

3076    MS. DATT:  Yes.

 

3077    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I would assume that given the size of the multicultural community and the number of communities and groups, et cetera and languages, that there would be a demand for -- you could easily fill programming for two channels.  But do you think that there's a viable case to have the one 60/40 model, and then a second either low-power or re-worked Shaw Multicultural Channel?

 

3078    MS. DATT:  Commissioner Cardozo, we are so confident of our capabilities, that if we are given the same playing field, if we have advertising and there's a 60/40 model in front of us and we have our own 100 percent ethnic, oh yes, we will survive and we'll make more money than them.  Oh, they'll make money from American programming; we'll make money from ethnic.

 

3079    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So in which case, you wouldn't have a problem with us licensing one of the two applications before us, and then in due course, when you or whoever -- I understand you have filed intentions to apply?

 

3080    MS. DATT:  Yes, we have.

 

3081    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So once you have applied for such a television station, that could be looked at in due course, and if it were licensed that could survive too?

 

3082    MS. DATT:  Yes, in my mind --

 

3083    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Mind you, they might come to that hearing --

 

3084    MS. DATT:  Yes, and -- that's true.

 

3085    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  -- and say they won't survive if you get --

 

3086    MS DATT:  I wouldn't be surprised that they would.  In fact, I would like them to come.

 

3087    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Is it difficult for you and others who have come to this hearing and saying what you're saying and the two before you, in a sense you've burnt your bridges, haven't you?  Like you ain't going to get no programming with these two programmers, do you think?

 

3088    MS. DATT:  Well, you know, last time when I said all that, somewhere in the back there were one of the applicants, one of their friends were sitting there, and I said, after this statement of mine, I will get no programming, and the guy said, "You bet".  So I don't know.  I mean, I have brought issues in front of you which concern me.  This is my reality.  What they're saying is their reality, but deep down in their heart, I'm sure they know what they have done, what they are doing and what they will be doing.

 

3089    So if they choose not to give me any programming, or if Rogers chooses not to carry my digital services in the east, or when they get -- if they get the licence, not to work with me, it's their prerogative and it's their karma.  That's all I say. 

 

3090    I haven't done anything -- if anything, Commissioner Cardozo, I have been a very loyal producer of Rogers.  I still, whenever I meet anyone of them, greet them very warmly.  If anything, I was one of the producers who would always say to them, "You've got so many hours of ethnic programming and you've got such a large ethnic population, why don't you promote your product through the ethnic programming?"  And do you know what?  In 1998, that's exactly what they did.  They took my suggestion and they, after every half an hour, there'd be two and a half minutes of their commercials that they would insert.  I didn't get any thank you for that.  Well, I didn't even want it.  That's okay.  I mean, I really genuinely wanted them to benefit something from all the service that they had given to the ethnic communities, and kudos to them for doing it for such a long time, and I know it has cost them money.  But I would like to know what I've done to them, apart from coming to the hearings now and showing that their applications are weak.  I don't think I've done anything to them that would hurt them, but if by my submission here does not give them a licence, or gives them a licence and they still don't want to talk to them --

 

3091    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And just, when you compare the two schedules, is either one better for the community, less harmful to you, the producers?

 

3092    MS. DATT:  Commissioner Cardozo, if we are allowed to have advertising on the Shaw Multicultural Channel, or if we go for low power --

 

3093    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:   I'm talking about the two applications in front of us.

 

3094    MS. DATT:  Yes.  And we are there at the same time with them, no, I don't think it concerns me.  But as a producer who has always looked out for the community that I am serving currently, this does not serve the South Asian community at all, neither of them.

 

3095    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Neither of them?

 

3096    MS. DATT:  Neither of them.

 

3097    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thank you very much.

 

3098    MS. DATT:  Thank you.

 

3099    COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

 

3100    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Ms. Datt, your views of the Roger's proposal are quite clear.  They are less clear about the Multivan proposal, other than to say - I was trying to find details about what criticism you have of it - and at paragraph 14 in your written presentation, and it's repeated in your oral presentation, you say:

 

 

 

Multivan's schedule betrays their lack of grasp of program scheduling, perhaps as a result of their lack of experience in television programming.

 

 

 

Is there not an opportunity for you to set them straight?

 

3101    MS. DATT:  You're being too kind to me.  Between you, me and the lamp post --

 

3102    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And the court reporter?

 

3103    MS. DATT:  We had had conversations with them.  At that time we had already put in a letter of intent, and I had already this application that I was working on -- I'm under $40,000 because we had already gotten a technical brief prepared, because that's the first thing you do.  That was done.  Legal counsel was hired.  Focus groups had already been worked on.  Programming was already worked.  And there was a demonstration outside my radio station which had nothing to do with our programming, and our major investor in my company pulled out.  And that was the time that we were talking to Multivan and James Ho and I've had two meetings.  I've even met Doug Holtby. 

 

3104    My proposal was not accepted by them.  I was bringing my producers with me, my programming with me, and myself with me, and it was not accepted.  And you know, I mean, that's their prerogative.  It's up to them.  Rogers never approached me, never called me.  If they had, I would have offered them the same thing.

 

3105    I asked them to send me their application and I got everything except for the schedule, which I had to go and look at the Commission's office and when I looked at the schedule, I am sorry to say, I wish I had brought our schedule which we were going to be presenting to you, but I was told that I would have had to make 15 copies and they were coloured ones, and that was costing a bit more money on the $40,000, so I thought I'll forget about that.  But our schedule really kept the communities in mind.  We also had 20 percent of English language programming in it, in one proposal.  In another one we were just working it out.  It does not give a feeling of -- what is a lifestyle program?  I don't understand what that means, and -- I don't understand.  In fact, I went through their correspondence with the Commission, and they've written from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on Monday to Friday they have South Asian programming.  The Commission asks them whether it is English or Punjabi, and in their brief summary it says Punjabi drama, but in answer to the Commission, they called it English language programming.  So I don't know which one is right, whether they're going to be doing Punjabi drama or English, because they have already answered to a deficiency and they've called it English, so I assume it is in the English language programming.

 

3106    So no detailed material was given about programming, whereas when you prepare, when you apply for a licence, you want to talk to your suppliers and you want to find out what sort of programming you will be presenting in all the languages.  You would get letters of commitment from the suppliers and they would say to you that, yes, if you get the licence we will provide you 100 hours of drama, or music, or you also figure out how much money you're going to be spending on local programming, on news programming and current affairs programming. I didn't see that in their application, and I'm terribly sorry about that because it's sad.

 

3107    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Ms. Datt, were you here yesterday and today while we discussed the two applications with the applicants --

 

3108    MS. DATT:  I was --

 

3109    THE CHAIRPERSON:  -- to try to get exactly more detail, more clarification, where there are always questions, otherwise we wouldn't have these hearings.  Were you here?

 

3110    MS. DATT:  I was here yesterday, and today I was so nervous because my written submission was about 13 minutes, and Ms. Vogel told me very clearly that she would chop me at 10 minutes, so I've been editing it all day.  And I'm so sorry, I haven't had a chance to --

 

3111    THE CHAIRPERSON:  You could have got some lessons from Mr. Lee and improved your delivery.

 

3112    MS. DATT:  But I did hear the entire submission by the Rogers group yesterday, and I made some notes as well.

 

3113    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Well, we thank you, Ms. Datt, for your appearance before us, especially since it's quite late.  I'm sure Ms. Vogel will be dutifully upset to hear that she got you so tense today, and will apologize profusely.

 

3114    MS. DATT:  Thank you so much.

 

3115    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.  Good evening.

 

3116    MS. DATT:  And have a very good stay in Vancouver.

 

3117    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  It's certainly been lovely weather despite the local broadcasters' dire predictions on Monday.  It just goes to show they don't know everything, so we agree with you there.

 

3118    MS. DATT:  Thank you.

 

3119    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I would like to adjourn now because it is quite late, but I will wait five minutes, and if some of the interveners who had thought they were going to appear tonight have a very serious problem about this, would they please speak to the secretary.   We would prefer to adjourn and start tomorrow morning, but I will wait a few minutes in case  that creates a serious problem for people.

 

3120     

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 2005 / Suspension à 2005

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 2008 / Reprise à 2008

 

 

 

3121    THE CHAIRPERSON:   We are planning to go no further than the general or opposing interventions which is down to number 11 in the agenda of LMtv.  We have no intention of hearing, other than the interveners who are opposing or making general comments, which is under the agenda, number 1 to 11 inclusive.  So the appearing interveners who are in support were not to be heard until tomorrow in any event.

 

3122    I'm a bit concerned because there are many more people than numbers 1 to 11 milling around.  Perhaps my generosity has been misinterpreted.

 

 

 

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 2008 / Suspension à 2008

 

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 2012 / Reprise à 2012

 

 

 

3123    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order, please.  This exercise has shown us that there are two appearing interveners who are in support who have flights early tomorrow morning.  So they are Dr. Karim Karim, and number 140, Mr. Braghwant.  We will hear those two and that will be it - we will adjourn until 8:30 tomorrow morning - since they have flights.  Dr. Karim, go ahead.

 

3124    DR. KARIM:  Good evening, Commissioners.  I would like to commence by saying a few words about myself.  I am presently the Acting Associate Director of Carleton University School of Journalism and Communication.  My previous employment includes 10  years as a senior researcher, and senior policy analyst at the Department of Canadian Heritage where I worked on issues of multi-culturism.  I've been examining the topic of media and ethnicity for some 20 years, and teach the subject in university courses and workshops.  My graduate students at Carleton come from across Canada, including Vancouver. 

 

3125    The research that I'm currently doing on Canadian ethnic media is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Metropolis, Canadian Heritage and Carleton University.  These national studies have involved the examination of South Asian ethnic broadcasting in Vancouver, along with South Asian broadcasting in other cities.  The research has included content analysis of television programming, and focus groups of audiences.

 

3126    I have also been active in the study of media portrayals of ethnicity and religion.  My book, entitled Islamic Media and Global Violence, won the 2001 Robinson prize of the Canadian Communication Association.

 

3127    As we're all aware, the bulk of free-to-air ethnic TV programming in Vancouver is community-based at present.  Community broadcasting is a vital feature of the Canadian mediascape and should continue to be cherished.  The presence of CFMT in Toronto has not diminished the vitality of community-based ethnic programming in southern and eastern Ontario.  However, the production values of community broadcasting are generally low.  It is high time that all Canadian cities have high-quality third language and ethnic TV programming.

 

3128    My national studies have included the examination of CFMT's South Asian programming.  That station's programming has consistently strived to maintain quality.  It is innovative and it has generally been sensitive to portrayal issues.  CFMT's broadcasts allow for cross-cultural interaction, including the interaction of minority audiences with the public sphere.  This kind of interaction is vital for the integration of new Canadians and for the strengthening of Canadian citizenship.  My study noted that some important events in the Canadian public sphere which were given short shrift in the mainstream media, were only covered in depth by CFMT, among the free-to-air stations. 

 

3129    For example, it was an historic occasion when Herb Dhaliwal was appointed as a full minister in the federal cabinet.  He is the first visible minority to serve at that level of government, yet in Ontario, it was only CFMT among the free-to-air stations which did a report on this event.  It was of great significance to many Canadians.

 

3130    An example of CFMT's innovative tendencies is a program entitled Ishtyle TV.  It is oriented towards South Asian youth, but takes into account the hybrid cultural environment in which they live.  It creatively blends South Asian and other Canadian cultures to provide an entertaining commercial program.  The courage and risk-taking involved in such ventures are laudable. 

 

3131    That is the reason why I use some of CFMT-TV's material as examples of quality ethnic television in my classes.  CFMT is also one of the few ethnic broadcasters that repeatedly appears in academic writings about Canadian ethnic media.

 

3132    On a personal note, I am a former resident of Vancouver, and was on the board of the Ismali Association in this city.  My wife and I have family and friends here whom we visit annually.  I would like the residents of this wonderful Canadian city to enjoy the high-quality ethnic television programming available in Ontario.  In fact, the case here is even stronger.  More than 75 percent of Vancouverites have non-British, non-French and non-aboriginal backgrounds.  Their arrival to this province dates back more than 150 years, but there is yet to be a free-to-air ethnic TV station in this city.  The residents of Vancouver deserve good quality television reflecting their own views of the city.  It is high time that their needs were met. 

 

3133    I've had the opportunity to look at the Multivan and LMtv applications. Multivan's case is based on local ownership and programming that seems focused on lifestyle.  There are many dots in this application which still have to be connected.  I'm personally concerned about the concentration of media ownership in Canada, however I'm convinced that ethnic audiences urgently need serious programming that addresses current issues from their perspective.

 

3134    CFMT's link with LMtv offers a proven track record, depth, quality and concern for the needs of minority groups that go beyond song and dance.  This is combined with a strong local team.  I feel that the presence of LMtv will set an important standard for ethnic programming in B.C., whose mediascape I hope will be filled with first-rate, free-to-air ethnic TV broadcasters.  Thank you.

 

3135    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Dr. Karim.  You're flying back to Ottawa tomorrow morning?

 

3136    DR. KARIM:  That's correct.

 

3137    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.  You know, when I left Ottawa I promised my colleagues I wouldn't do this, which is sitting until after 8:00, so I hope that you will appreciate that I did, because I may be lynched before tomorrow morning.

 

3138    DR. KARIM:  Well, I must say I'm in awe of the stamina of all of you.

 

3139    THE CHAIRPERSON:  So we certainly appreciate your coming.  There obviously is an attempt by the Commission to hear as many people as possible in the time frame that is reasonably suitable for them.  If we don't engage in long discussions or questions, it's not that we're not interested.  Your presentation has been taken by the court reporter.  It will be part of the record, as will your written presentation.  But we appreciate your patience.

 

3140    DR. KARIM:  No.  I appreciate your --

 

3141    THE CHAIRPERSON:  You're almost as good as me.

 

3142    DR. KARIM:  Well, I appreciate very much your --

 

3143    THE CHAIRPERSON:  And I hope you have a good trip back to Carleton.

 

3144    DR. KARIM:  Thank you.  And thanks for allowing me to speak here.

 

3145    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, and good night.

 

3146    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Madam Secretary.

 

3147    THE SECRETARY:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Our next intervener is Braghwant Sandhu, who is before you now whenever you're ready.

 

3148    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I must apologize.  I did not use your surname properly, Mr. Sandhu, and go ahead when you're ready.

 

3149    MR. SANDHU:  That's fine.  My name is Braghwant Sandhu.  My ethnic background is Punjabi Sikh, and I'm a resident of Victoria, British Columbia.  I'm also the Executive Director of the B.C. Equal Opportunity Secretariat.  However, I do want to emphasize that I'm not here on behalf of my employer or any organized interest group.  I'm simply here representing myself.

 

3150    So, ladies and gentlemen, I've been told that when addressing CRTC commissioners, it's customary, if not critical, to establish one's credentials up front.  Apparently it helps to outlay one's professional history and business acumen in order to be taken seriously.  My premise, however, is that speaking to you as an ordinary Canadian ought to be sufficient to lend credibility to my remarks. Consequently, I'm not here as an expert in multiculturalism or television broadcasting, or even as someone with great insights on the comparative merits of the two applications before you.

 

3151    It is incidental that I've travelled throughout the province, and in due course have amassed a certain knowledge base concerning our ethnic communities.  I know, for instance, that by the year 2005, there will be over 1,000,000 in Vancouver whose mother tongue is neither English nor French.

 

3152    I also know that LMtv will provide programs in at least 18 different languages, that LMtv will spend $27,000,000 to ensure that B.C. based, independent producers get to develop these programs, and I know that LMtv will fund half a million dollars in scholarships to develop future generations of ethnic broadcasters.  It is obvious to me that LMtv intends to put its money where its mouth is, but this is hardly a reason to compel an ordinary Canadian to write to the CRTC, and then to request to speak to the panel of commissioners as I have done, and particularly at this late time in the day.

 

3153    Frankly, my reasons for being are uniquely Canadian.  I believe that inherent in our national psyche is an appreciation for assiduousness and persistency.  The folks at LMtv have been pursuing a CRTC licence for over eight years.  The fact is that LMtv first started its community consultations in 1993 as a run-up to its 1996 application.  That application, as you well know, was rejected.

 

3154    Most ad hoc type of ventures would have packed up and left town by then.  LMtv, however, has persevered.  They continued building positive coalitions across the province and strengthened the application for the next round. Newspaper articles, endorsements and testimonials of prominent community leaders speak to LMtv's endurance.  With sustained patience, LMtv submitted yet another application in 1999.  That application was also rejected by a vote of three to two.

 

3155    Again, most ad hoc ventures would have given up and left town.  You will recall that in your CRTC judgment last year, Commissioner Grauer stated that while multicultural communities in both Montreal and Toronto are served by free, local over-the-air ethnic television service, Vancouver has none.  So eight years later, the CRTC is yet again about to grant a broadcast licence, and as a trooper, LMtv is trying yet again to get that licence.

 

3156    A lot has transpired in these eight years.  Most notably, Ms. Jaffer, LMtv's advisory board chair, has had the distinction of becoming the first visible minority senator for Western Canada.  Business-wise, Vancouver's ethnic market, which was ignored for years is now being recognized for its potential of up to 15 to $30,000,00 in annual revenues.  Not surprisingly, a number of players are starting to emerge on the scene, but as Canadians, we favour industriousness over opportunism; we value substance over presentation; and commitment over expediency. 

 

3157    I've spoken of LMtv's persistence in the pursuit of a CRTC licence.  What about its track record?  LMtv has 22 years of experience in ethnic television programming.  Many consider it a pioneer of ethnic television in North America.  When news viewers plan for Ottawa and Victoria, LMtv will have their hour newscasts in Chinese and in Punjabi language.  This is unmatched in our country.

 

3158    But you have a myriad of criteria against which you must measure the applications before you.  How, for instance, do these applicants intend to make the ethnic station commercially viable?  Some estimates suggest that it will take up to seven years for the station to break even.  For its part, LMtv contends that in addition to attracting local advertisers, they will also access advertising from its multilingual networks in Toronto and Montreal. 

 

3159    Is this business case enough to grant LMtv a licence?  Perhaps it is, but as I've stated earlier, my reasons for being here are quite simple.  I only wish that as commissioners you attempt to reflect our core Canadian values in your decision-making process.  Weigh the applicants under business case, as you no doubt are required to do, but at that same time do not neglect to reward commitment and tireless perseverance.  Vote in the favour of fortitude, resilience and endurance.  You are, in effect, presiding over the race between a tortoise and a rabbit.  I hope you side with the contestant who is dedicated, has demonstrated that it's in it for the long haul, who has put its money where its mouth is, and who has an undisputed track record of commitment to ethnic television programming.

 

3160    I hope you do the right Canadian thing, and finally grant LMtv the licence it justifiably deserves.  Thanks very much.  Questions.

 

3161    THE CHAIRPERSON:  I'm impressed, Mr.  Sandhu.  You managed to get almost a new catechism of virtues, as well as I think citing one of La Fontaine's fables, right? 

 

3162    MR. SANDHU:  I did my research.

 

3163    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can I conclude that persistence is only second to good credentials, or the opposite?

 

3164    MR. SANDHU:  Well, I think there's an interconnection between a naïve persistence based on you know, models and information which is perhaps outdated or whatnot, of course, is secondary.  But when you do have, as I've cited, a persistence that seeks to improve at every turn, continues to build coalitions, continues to improve its application.  I mean, I'm here, frankly, because I've watched these folks for the last eight years, and I've read about them.  Frankly, I don't know, you know, sort of who are the people at the top, and so forth.  As I said, I'm simply here as a Canadian.  But I've observed what's been going on.  And surely at some point in our approach to things as Canadians, we ought to reward and recognize that persistence, to some extent, equates with being in it for the long haul, you know, putting your money where your mouth is, I called it.  There's some costs.  Ms. Datt mentioned about $40,000.  Eight years times $40,000, I mean that's a significant -- if that's the minimum amount.  I think there is a demonstration there of a seriousness which I think you should factor in your decision-making.  That's all the points that I've been trying to make.

 

3165    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Sandhu, and thank you for staying with us.

 

3166    MR. SANDHU:  Well, thank you very much.

 

3167    THE CHAIRMAN:  And I understand you're leaving town?

 

3168    MR. SANDHU:  Well, I'm from Victoria, Punjabi Sikh from Victoria, so I have to go back home.

 

3169    THE CHAIRMAN:  It's a good thing you didn't tell us this before.  The other gentleman had to go all the way to Ottawa.  Thank you very much and have a good evening. 

 

3170    I understand, Madam Secretary, that we have one more person to accommodate.

 

3171    THE SECRETARY:  One more, Madam Chair.  I'm sorry, Manpreet Grewal, please go ahead whenever you're ready.

 

3172    MS. GREWAL:  Thank you so much for accommodating me tonight because I can't be here tomorrow.  I know it's getting late, so thanks again for your patience.

 

3173    I'm a freelance -- I'm wearing two hats actually.  One is I'm a freelance journalist.  I've written columns on Canada's diversity in various community newspapers, and also for the Vancouver Sun.

 

3174    I have also produced a show called Cross-Cultural for Shaw Community Television, which is different from Shaw Multicultural Channel.  I've also done some freelance work for CBC radio for the Early Edition program.

 

3175    With my other hat, I work for an immigrant-serving organization where I've been involved in developing, designing and implementing programs in different languages for our immigrant community.  As such, in that role, we have used the ethnic media for the dissemination of information, and have a vested interest in the media doing its role in terms of educating and integrating people into Canadian society.

 

3176    Most of my journalistic work has been in the English language, but I'm a consumer of ethnic programming.  I'm an immigrant to Canada, and I remember when I came here one of the first things which I really, really enjoyed and helped me get a sense of belonging was actually Shushma that has RimJhim as a radio and I use that radio, and it was a great pleasure, and it's a great broadcasting tool.

 

3177    I strong believe that the ethnic community in the Vancouver and Lower Mainland does not feel adequately represented or reflected in the mainstream media; their issues are not important;  their stories don't get told the way they want them to be told.  And although the mainstream media cannot be absolved of its responsibility to be inclusive, ethnic media has its unique niche in our society.

 

3178    There are a lot of people who watch the ethnic media, not only for, you know, foreign programming in their own language, but for news within Canada, or events happening within Canada, and that's what sort of connects them to the larger society.  So as such, I'm a very strong supporter of ethnic language programming.  What is kind of sad for me to see is that there are different levels of standards in which ethnic programming is produced.  When I heard Shushma's presentation, I totally agree that she's a professional broadcaster, and I watch her programming and I really enjoy her programming.  But the reality is that everybody on air is not a professional broadcaster, and people are consuming a lot of variety of programs which are not of the -- the quality doesn't even come close to what the commercial networks have to offer.

 

3179    And that really saddens me, because I think minorities should not be subjected to a lower standard of broadcasting.  And again, like Shushma, there must be other producers who do a very good job as well, but I'm talking about a large number of people who just do not do that adequate of a job.  And even Shushma herself mentioned that, you know, when she saw her work on NOW and when she saw her work on Shaw, there was a difference.  The other thing is these independent producers do not have much control over how the standards are set for those channels, so that's a huge concerns as well.  And I think it's really, really important that minorities get the same standard of broadcasting which the others do.

 

3180    The other strong feeling I have is, you know, where there's proven experience, that is almost key.  When people have been there, done that, they've walked through the hoops and they know what happened and they've learned through their mistakes and they've learned through their experiences.  And I feel that the LMtv licence or the LMtv application speaks to some of the proven experience in Toronto.  I have a friend who just moved from Toronto here, and she's saying, "Well, you don't have something like CFMT?"  She said, "I used to watch CFMT all the time."  And this kind of programming is not often of an equal level to CFMT, and I've always seen that for myself as well, and I've seen some of CFMT programming which is really of high quality.  So I really appreciate that.

 

3181    The other thing is in terms of the intent.  Like, lots of people come into these things with the right intent.  I remember a few years back when VTV was getting licensed in this community, I think they paid a lot of attention to Canada's diversity and trying to do community consultations to be more inclusive, and I think they came in with the right intent, but they did not come in with the proven experience.

 

3182    So even just this last Saturday I was watching a newscast on VTV at night, again speaking to the --  the police are very concerned about the escalating violence in the Indo-Canadian community, and this was just related to one murder which had happened outside a temple.  It wasn't a broader Indo-Canadian issue; it was specific to some of those individuals who were involved in that.  And I was thinking, I said here we go again, you know, the media portraying things.  And this was a channel which had really, really spoken to being very inclusive and being sensitive to those things, and I think the proven experience was the missing piece in that thing.

 

3183    I think the other thing is about local production, and local production is important but -- but, you know, global production is important as well.  Like, you want to be linked to other pieces in Canada.  You want to be able to resource the expertise which is available, and as long as it doesn't take away from the local content and the resources that are put here locally to do whatever needs to be done, I think it's important that there be more resources from outside of the local community as well, which come to bearing.

 

3184    Again, I'll give VTV's example is what -- I just actually started to watch VTV since it became a part of CTV, and I saw just that there's a change just in terms of probably the resources which have come to bear on it.  I'm not sure, but that's just my impression.

 

3185    So in that thing I really do think Vancouver needs multilingual television station.  I really do think LMtv is the best applicant at this point, positioned to serve the communities.  If they don't, and if we get something again which is, you know, a few producers getting together, or a few investors getting together and putting something together, I don't know if we would have gotten any further ahead as consumers of that programming in terms of the standards.  Thank you.

 

3186    THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Ms. Grewal.  You obviously keep your alertness and your eloquence until late hours.  We thank you for staying with us, and I now have an excuse for sitting so late.  We just want to impress Commission Grauer that we're very sophisticated in Ottawa, as well as in Vancouver, and have late dinners.

 

3187    Thank you.  Thank you to everybody for staying with us so late.  We will be back at 8:30 tomorrow morning, and we may very well not be able to hear all interveners tomorrow and have some on Thursday morning, so we'll hopefully accommodate everybody.

 

‑‑‑ Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2035, to resume on Wednesday, October 17, 2001, at 0830 / L'audience est ajournée à 2035, pour reprendre le mercredi 17 avril 2001 à 0830

 

"I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and accurate transcript of the proceedings herein, to the best of my skill and ability."

 

Patricia Kealy